tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post7390135085498781069..comments2023-12-11T06:02:28.864-05:00Comments on The Wise Fool: God's Altered PromiseTWFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06016277303703254572noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-67457690968580296462010-02-25T18:59:06.505-05:002010-02-25T18:59:06.505-05:00I couldn't agree with you more about the fact ...I couldn't agree with you more about the fact that there is still wisdom to be found in the Bible. It's not all good, but it is far from being all bad either. There are definitely some good guidelines and a lot of information on human psychology and sociology.<br /><br />Plus, truth be told, I love listening to sermons and studying the Bible. It makes you actually take a moment to think about life in the grand scheme of things, and can help you become a better person if used properly.TWFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06016277303703254572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-47665531635015735642010-02-25T13:15:41.557-05:002010-02-25T13:15:41.557-05:00Have been meaning to get back to your last comment...Have been meaning to get back to your last comment. I think also that critiquing the bible from a fundamentalist/literalist perspective is likely the most accurate, reading as it was intended. And it certainly is relevant because so many people take that stance today, regardless of what the "best" way of reading it is.<br /><br />As far as reading it allegorically, I think that is the best way to read it if people are going to find "faith" in it as divinely inspired literature. I agree that faith is not necessarily historically Jewish or Christian, though I think some elements of reading it that way probably are historically correct (I am no expert there). But personally I think the wisdom to be found (it isn't all bunk), is the wisdom common to man, I don't find an underlying Truth there anymore.atimetorendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563649474540441597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-68486117225465410022010-02-07T20:51:53.719-05:002010-02-07T20:51:53.719-05:00Yes, it probably is fair to say that this post, an...Yes, it probably is fair to say that this post, and many more I've written, scrutinize the fundamentalist/literalist point of view. I'm trying to write "accurate" critiques of the Torah and the Gospels, which is easiest and perhaps most appropriately done in view of fundamentalism/literalism.<br /><br />I've checked out some of your posts too, like Deconstructing Daniel. Good stuff there.<br /><br />I've been wondering if there is any underlying truth in Scripture. Man's tampering is obvious, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's all bunk. Maybe reading allegories from particular sections of Scripture is the way to find God, but such a faith wouldn't exactly be Jewish or Christian.TWFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06016277303703254572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-79901131582859730002010-02-06T20:41:04.735-05:002010-02-06T20:41:04.735-05:00Thanks for the correspondence offer, I'll prob...Thanks for the correspondence offer, I'll prob. take you up on that.<br /><br />"<i>I would venture to say that even reading the text in an allegorical manner paints some problems too, unless you pull back from the details so far as to only get an overall picture.</i>"<br /><br />I agree with you there. I know a more allegorical approach would be more consistent with liberal Christianity. I guess my initial impression was that your original post is shooting down a fundamentalist/literalist Christianity. Which it does effectively, but in a way it is shooting down a parody of what Christianity can be. Fundamentalism can be too easy of a target! I know, I regularly shoot it down myself. <br /><br />At the same time, I don't prescribe to the more liberal Christianity either. I left a conservative version, have since gained an appreciation for the more allegorical version, without embracing it as a personal "faith" myself.atimetorendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563649474540441597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-67790619984591201762010-02-06T20:31:12.206-05:002010-02-06T20:31:12.206-05:00Well put, and I think you touch on another interes...Well put, and I think you touch on another interesting aspect of ages, or cultural norms for a given epoch of time. Life being more unpredictable and subject to the elements back then would have made a deity seem to be ruled by all the same emotions of men, which is what you seem to find in the OT. Our more-controlled lives lend themselves to the idea that a god is purely benevolent, which is what you find preached in many modern churches today. This is just speaking in generalizations, of course.<br /><br />I would venture to say that even reading the text in an allegorical manner paints some problems too, unless you pull back from the details so far as to only get an overall picture.<br /><br />If you'd like to exchange some dialog off the record, so to speak, feel free to email me at onemanstruth@yahoo.com. However, you are more than welcome to continue posting comments if you'd like.TWFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06016277303703254572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-60081913432453851722010-02-05T22:28:29.093-05:002010-02-05T22:28:29.093-05:00Yes, I think that is what I am saying that the rel...Yes, I think that is what I am saying that the religion evolved that way. What your post shows I think is the jumbled up mess that people are confronted with when from one age to another they decide they should try to take the texts literally and/or authoritatively.atimetorendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563649474540441597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-44016258872533061712010-02-05T21:53:08.289-05:002010-02-05T21:53:08.289-05:00Thanks for the comment atimetorend.
That is one o...Thanks for the comment atimetorend.<br /><br />That is one of those sticky points: allegory versus history. To those who believe the New Testament to be history, there is an obligation to believe the Old Testament was literal history. Jesus certainly is portrayed as believing in the literal history of the OT.<br /><br />I'm guessing that the apparent changes in the covenant were just the result of imprecise or inconsistent story telling. Given all of the typos I've made in this blog, even in day of word processing and spell checking, I'm sure that writing on scrolls while retaining the stories in memory produced lots of such errors.<br /><br />More to the heart of it though, I think your sentiment may be correct (if I am understanding you correctly); that this religion evolved out of a need to explain why things were the way they were under the direction of a benevolent God.TWFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06016277303703254572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5509207392481380457.post-17287175555633032010-02-05T12:45:06.439-05:002010-02-05T12:45:06.439-05:00"God has altered His original promise to Abra..."<i>God has altered His original promise to Abraham by adding new terms and conditions which effectively null and void the original covenant, because they provide God the opportunity to fulfill that covenant only when it is pleasing to Him.</i>"<br /><br />If you don't read the text as literal history but rather as an apologetic for God which someone wrote as a story maybe it makes more sense? We have all these evidences (good harvests, failed harvests, etc.) and we believe God does it all, so in story form the conditions change. Yeah, why make up the changed conditions, but maybe that kept it consistent with a certain view of God (omnipotent and good) which they already held?atimetorendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10563649474540441597noreply@blogger.com