Yahoo Groups archive

The Logic Off Topic list

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:27 UTC

Thread

religious scholars

religious scholars

2001-11-03 by GAmoore@aol.com

>While I could be wrong, my guess is that we have a lot of people here making
>pronouncements about these writings (and the theology they present) who are
>not theologians, biblical scholars, or Koran scholars. Like amateur
>musicians, they are entitled to their opinions, and I personally don't mind
>them expressing them. 

Why does it take a religious scholar to have a spiritual relationship 
with "God" by whatever name? Even common people can love a song and get 
an emotional charge from it - without an explanation from a musician. 
Maybe the religions are bureacracies. Someone always wants to feel they 
know what God is thinking better than you do, and want you to pay a few 
sheckels for the priviledge of that knowledge.

Re: religious scholars

2001-11-03 by Lachlan Deck

Hi there,

> >While I could be wrong, my guess is that we have a lot of people here 
> making
> >pronouncements about these writings (and the theology they present) 
> who are
> >not theologians, biblical scholars, or Koran scholars. Like amateur
> >musicians, they are entitled to their opinions, and I personally don't 
> mind
> >them expressing them.

Referred to later...
...
> Why does it take a religious scholar to have a spiritual relationship
> with "God" by whatever name? Even common people can love a song and get
> an emotional charge from it - without an explanation from a musician.
> Maybe the religions are bureacracies. Someone always wants to feel they
> know what God is thinking better than you do, and want you to pay a few
> sheckels for the priviledge of that knowledge.

Hmm. The common person actually hears the music, however to not even 
know someone's name may possibly reflect the depth of a relationship. 
Most relationships start when people are introduced which often involves 
learning someone's name. Sure there are occasions when you can say hello 
to someone casually and kick yourself for forgetting their name the next 
time but this is more of an acquaintance rather than someone you are in 
a, well, meaningful relationship with.

But, on the other hand, there are those as you say who certainly seem 
very "religious" but may not be any closer to the mark.
Jesus was very hard on a group called the Pharasees, calling them a 
brood of vipers! (Eg Matthew 23:1ff).

So, how do we know who to listen to. Many claim to know. Many claim 
special insight. Can everyone one be correct at the same time? ie Can 
all these so-called truths be, well, true? Still many are just lost and 
haven't got a clue, so it seems. These are very difficult questions to 
answer, but if I might suggest from a human point of view...

Who would you talk to in order to find out about my Father?
Many might try to describe him, or even claim to know him (just as many 
do with God) - however no one on this list has met or even seen him 
(ie.my Father).

Would you even try to describe him?
It's kind of absurd for people to claim this, that and the other about 
him (my Father) when they haven't even met him isn't it?

Surely, you would ask someone, or better - it must be revealed to you 
from someone very close to him in order to know him? Even his son (ie 
me). All others are pretenders.

And so it is with God. The only way we can know God is by revelation. ie 
God makes the move.
We cannot suppose about God in all reality (as what we actually do is 
create god in our own image - just how we like), but we can only know 
the real God when and how God chooses to be revealed.

So, this then is the all important question - is Jesus God's son?

If he is God's son - then when he says to Pilate...
[ "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was 
born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. 
Everyone on the side of truth listens to me." (John18:37) ]
...means that truth is found in him.
He also says, ["I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to 
the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my 
Father as well." (John14:6ff)].

So, here is the crunch. If Jesus is God's son, then his authority is 
unquestionable - ie when he says "no one" then it is just that.
If he's not God's son, then we must disregard what he says.

He's either (as I think one famous writer put it) a liar, a lunetic or 
the Son of God.

.....
> Hey I would agree with you - that war is fundamentally against the
> principles of all religions. The fact that all sorts of groups can twist
> religion to justify their wars just shows you the extent to which they
> don't follow their own principles. Imagine if an alien were to land and
> ask "what is religion?" and come away with the conclusion that its a set
> of rules for which people die and kill for, but are too busy to follow.

If you remove relationship out of religion you have a meaningless cause.
Humans get things wrong: sometimes willfully; sometimes habitually.

That said, the important thing to realise is that a bad egg doesn't make 
bad eggs all round. ie Just because you have had a bad experience with 
an egg doesn't mean that eggs are bad. And so, just because...or better 
put:
	if you're looking for a problem with Christians for example you 
will always find it; with every single one. In fact the person who 
claims to be [a Christian] perfect is deceived(1John1).
	Jesus said, when the Pharasees questioned as to why he would eat 
with tax collectors and sinners (ie the scum of society in his day): "It 
is not the healthy that need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to 
call the righteous, but sinners."

So, a Christian is not one because of any effort, great or small [, or 
because of any difference or specialty from others] on their part but 
because of God's grace. Naturally they are called to "Be holy, as I am 
holy" but they must strive to be obedient and repentant - this is love 
for God (thanksgiving).

But again, the focus is often in the wrong area (can't see the forest 
for all the trees).
In response to the first comment - most people's adverse reactions to 
Christianity for example are because of people. There are certainly 
countless unrighteous deeds done in the name of religion, let alone 
Christianity.
However,
The focus needs to be on Jesus as it is he that is calling people to 
himself and not the [imperfect]Christian. It is his life that should be 
examined...again if he is who he claims to be then his word alone is 
trustworthy...and if he is who he says he is, then it is him alone that 
we all must stand before to give an account...


with regards,

--
Lachlan Deck
ldeck@...

[L-OT] Re: religious scholars

2001-11-04 by Dennis Gunn

>  Hey I would agree with you - that war is fundamentally against the
>  principles of all religions. The fact that all sorts of groups can twist
>  religion to justify their wars just shows you the extent to which they
>  don't follow their own principles. Imagine if an alien were to land and
>  ask "what is religion?" and come away with the conclusion that its a set
>  of rules for which people die and kill for, but are too busy to follow.

All?  I am no authority, but I have the feeling that there have 
probably been lots of religions where war was perfectly acceptable. 
Shintoism, Japan's native religion, for example does not particularly 
forbid it if I am not mistaken.

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.