quote: Besides that, it's an illogical comparison and one more reason I will not engage you any further.
Yeah, well Jesus must've had plenty of "illogical comparisons". Imagine comparing the growth potential of a seed to 4 levels of spiritual commitment. Imagine comparing the most respected religious leaders in his country to whited sepulchres. Imagine comparing flying birds to God's care for his people. Imagine comparing Himself to the door of the sheep. Imagine comparing Himself to that manna which came down from heaven.
quote: Where's "the word's" driver's license? I'd like to see it.
The word IS the driver's license. It's a metaphor; a comparison by representation. VP taught what Bullinger taught about this. A similie is a comparison by resemblance (The word is like a driver's license). A metaphor is a comparison by representation (The word is a driver's license). Hypocatastasis is a comparison by implication (Driver's license!).
This isn't just in the bible. If Jim Morrison had named the song "LA is like a woman" it would have been a similie. "LA is a woman", a metaphor. But he dropped all the formalities and called it "LA Woman". Implication. He probably borrowed the logic from Burton Cummings of the Guess Who, who 1 year earlier had a hit with "American Woman". Same figure. Interestingly, Burton Cummings currently lives in LA and performs there regularly. He doesn't want the American woman's war machines or ghetto scenes, but the LA woman's money is OK.
Now that we all understand metaphors, similies, and hypocatahooha, lets take the next step. Not all metaphors work. How does this one work?
This is how I see it. A drivers license is a form of ID that verifies who you are as well as numerous other things about you. Why does it verify it? Because I have several other forms of ID that I used to get it and an objective source has verified them to be legit.
So lets just say there was a time before God could drive. Where is his birth certificate, SS card, and two other forms of valid ID. I would like to make sure that his driver's license isn't a fake. Is there a water mark so to speak? I can match a face to the name on mine, always helpful. Where is his?
Do you see the problem people are having with this?
I think I tried saying this before the figure of speech lesson came (thanks, haven't had one since TWI), but I agree with Lindy. It's an invalid metaphore.
A drivers license's sole purpose for existence is proof of identity and authorization. No such thing exist for the Bible. The author of the majority of the books isn't even known, let alone there being proof that he/she actually wrote it, wasn't making it up, lying, or was just plain mental.
Then why bother posting such statements if you don't have anything to back it up?
There is a proof for deaf people to know that music exists and be able to experience it. What do you have against deaf people? If I were deaf, I would appreciate someone showing me how to experience music.
But if we were to take the non-proof route that you suggest, then a deaf person would be told that music exist but must take the person at their word. No benifit for them and they never truly know for sure, they only have your word on it. What use it then?
Point out the personal attack and I'll remove it. I really don't see it. Could it be you're just taking things a bit too personally?
I offer a logical rebutal to your post and the best you can come back with is urine contaminated slim fast?
I do believe the topic is The Word of God is the Will of God. I posit that such a statement, or any sub-statements extending it, require proof. You claim no proof is required or that any metaphor is valid as long as it has something to do with God or the Bible. I disagree. Do you wish to discuss or no?
Well, you only need one point of comparison for the metaphor to "work". "metaphor" and "point of comparison" got me this from Google...
"An important aspect of this comparison is that the two objects which are being compared are essentially dissimilar in all aspects other than the point of comparison."
So, I could guess the point could be ... I accept the Bible as proof positive like a driver's license cuz ... um ... whatever ... and I'm glad we don't use other documents to try to substantiate the validity ... cuz ... um, that would just confuse things (I actually believe that part LOL). Anyway, any one point of comparison would do ... it would be hard to say it is invalid as I see it ... unclear, poorly stated, whatever ... I guess I'm speaking up partly cuz I think it is OK to just believe the Bible cuz it was good enough for grandpa ... and considering other sources doesn't always make things clearer or better (where did it get twi?). In any case, the validity of the metaphor used isn't the issue, is it?
But here is what gets me ... a thread can be unraveled ... a train of thought can be derailed or taken off track ... but HOW DO YOU DERAIL A THREAD ????
We hear this all the time on this site, yet ... Where is the outrage? I guess that is a mixed metaphor. But there's no point in rehashing all this, I mean, you can beat a dead horse to water... but you can't make him drink.
Here's another point about metaphors: they mostly just illustrate a point that is already established, they in no way prove the point.
For johniam, who as far as I know believes in the inerrancy of the bible, the driver's license analogy makes sense. For him, the bible is the standard against which everything else is measured. For others, who don't hold such a belief, the analogy is flawed. The bible as driver's license only works if one already accepts the premise that the bible is "right".
One of the things that I saw recur in TWI was the use of illustrations to prove the point. An example is the teaching on epiluo, which Bullinger taught was "to let loose", and illustrated the letting loose, by comparing it to dogs being unleashed to run down the game. The definition, filtered through Wierwille and later Martindale, focussed on the dogs and not the letting loose itself, establishing in TWI minds that interpretation was bad.
Another poster and I questioned the TWI definition on biblical grounds, as well as showing how Bullinger was misunderstood by Wierwille (I understand that other posters may disagree with me on this...my main problem was how TWI leaders handled the question...). Rather than "going to the Word", or going to a lexicon other some other source that would better explain the TWI position, both sets of leaders proceeded to explain the analogy, lecturing on dogs and hunting and training, etc. The example became equal to the bible!
Here's another point about metaphors: they mostly just illustrate a point that is already established, they in no way prove the point.
Good point, except I don't think the point has to be established ... the metaphor is to help establish or explain the point
The bible as driver's license only works if one already accepts the premise that the bible is "right".
Again, I think the metaphor "works" since he said it. As you said, it is just to illustrate his "premise." Whether it is clear enough to convince anyone is another matter. lol I really wish I'd studied a little more logic ... but I think that is right. A perfect metaphor proves no more than a lame one.
as well as showing how Bullinger was misunderstood by Wierwille
I did my research paper on structure in romans (good gawd). It mostly rehashed Bullinger ... but I remember one place at the end where VP put one verse extra in a previous section .. it made no sense ... the smart way guy I talked to said to put it the way VP said, so I toed the line ... I think VP was like a high school student cheating on his homework, changing a few things so it doesn't look identical ... Later I got a letter asking about making my paper into a article for GMIR. I thought, "holy crap" what the hell do I really know about structure of romans ... they got schoenheidt, cummins, crouch, and they want my sheeet ... they must really be hard up LOL
(I understand that other posters may disagree with me on this...my main problem was how TWI leaders handled the question...). Rather than "going to the Word", or going to a lexicon other some other source that would better explain the TWI position, both sets of leaders proceeded to explain the analogy, lecturing on dogs and hunting and training, etc. The example became equal to the bible!
WOOF ... so you are saying that is when the way went to the dogs?
Sometimes you have to call em like you se 'em, and let the sleeping dogs fall where they may!
quote: For johniam, who as far as I know believes in the inerrancy of the bible, the driver's license analogy makes sense. For him, the bible is the standard against which everything else is measured. For others, who don't hold such a belief, the analogy is flawed. The bible as driver's license only works if one already accepts the premise that the bible is "right".
Yeah, it's a credibility thing. I DO believe the bible is God's "ID" just as much as a driver's license is a person's ID, but the analogy is not a 100% match.
A driver's license gives limited info to interested parties in limited situations, but it says nothing about character or virtue. The bible, on the other hand, gives much detailed info about the god it speaks of. IMO VPW did an excellent job in PFAL of making God approachable. But LCM sure fixed that, didn't he?
quote: Do you wish to discuss or no?
No. We have different belief systems and all we'll do is p*ss each other off as we already have. Feel free to hurl the last insult if you wish.
Vee pee and craiggers were not allowed to make mistakes on teachings NOR on the metaphors or other examples they used in their teachings - if some TWIt questioned it (and it was wrong) then the problem then became on the TWIt's understanding of the teaching/example and not the teaching/example itself. We seem to have the same problem here. :)
It seems to me that there is no way to show someone that the word of God is the will of God without using the word of God. Therefore, it's a "take it on faith" or "just believe God" sort of thing. Blind faith doesn't sit well with me - especially knowing about the history of what books were allowed, what books may not have been and who was responsible for making those decisions.
We hear the excuse all the time that men are fallible but I don't understand why it's so hard for people who believe the Bible to be 100% God's word and completely inerrant tend to overlook that fallibility when it comes to the composition of the Bible, yet use that excuse quite frequently when it's convenient for other discussions. :blink:
It seems to me that there is no way to show someone that the word of God is the will of God without using the word of God.
I'm just unwinding with a beer here ... but I'd say maybe you have to use gravity to prove gravity .... so if someone really could make the "original texts" fit like VP claimed, that would be fine by me :) But right, the blind faith thing can get silly ... blind atheism faith can be silly too maybe ...
... but I'd say maybe you have to use gravity to prove gravity ....
Can you expand on that? I'm not sure that you need gravity to prove gravity...maybe I just don't understand your point.
I don't think you can ever "prove" that the bible or "the Word of God" is actually from God. Most of what I see here and elsewhere is along the lines of "it worked for me". IT being speaking in tongues, answers to prayer, miracles, etc. It all comes down to personal experience, i.e. experiencing what the bible says that you should experience, or interpreting your experience in light of the bible.
Does that experience make the bible any more "true" than anything else? Subjectively, maybe, but lots of folks have varying experiences. All "true" in their own context, but not to others.
m1 and m2 are the masses of the two objects in kilograms
r21,2 is the square of the distance between the two objects in meters2
and F1,2 is the attractive force between the two objects in Newtons.
So what?
(and yes, I realize that Newtonian gravity has been superceded by Unified Field Theory, but it's a lot easier to explain)
This theory requires a bunch of values (the mass of the objects; the distance between the center of the objects) in order to determine the value of the force (gravity). And keep in mind that the constant "G" was not defined for 130 years after Newton published his work!
You can't prove gravity without the two objects. You sure can't come up with the value of "G" without some precision measurement of the relationship between the two objects.
There is an interesting analogy there if you care to examine it.
Can you expand on that? I'm not sure that you need gravity to prove gravity...maybe I just don't understand your point.
I don't think you can ever "prove" that the bible or "the Word of God" is actually from God.
Does that experience make the bible any more "true" than anything else? Subjectively, maybe, but lots of folks have varying experiences. All "true" in their own context, but not to others.
Ummm... I think my point was much looser ... i shouldn't have said prove, but "show" as Belle had said. I guess I'm thinking that if the Bible was absolute truth, but just needed to be understood, it would be like gravity ... just needing the proper mathematically exact understanding. I don't believe it actually fits at all exactly, but if it did, it would be the formula that always worked, if you could understand all the forces (objects?) at work in the situation. So the Bible would be the formula I guess. And life would be the two objects interacting. Maybe it is getting a little too string theory like ... which I totally don't understand, I'll stick with Newton :)
But it might depend on what you believe about "the Living Word" ... becoming flesh, being God ... all that, to try to extend the analogy.
I'm not the sharpest light bulb in the drawer, but I think you need gravity to "prove" it. The formula is just theory without the measurement of the objects. Actually the formula is just a measurement of gravity anyway, not a proof that it exists, I'm thinking ... well, I'm trying to think And gravity is actually just a word referring to a force (OK, that's just another word) It's all so esoterical really ...
But the "fact" that we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with that formula indicates that the force does exist. So to the extent a person is able to understand the Bible in a way that it accurately and consistently measures life ... The Word indicates that God exists.
indicates it for that person ... if "The Word" is God, then "IT" exists regardless of any measurements ... like gravity exists without our definition of it. I liked that verse .. by God all things cohere .. science just measures the forces, no inkling of how or why they exist, and no explanation of how or why life exists ... just some measurements ...
OK, the two little gerbils on the treadmill in my brain have been running full speed for a couple minutes now .... I need a break
You can't prove God. Remember that Henry explained the Ford, but the Ford never explained Henry? It says in Hebrews somewhere that God couldn't swear by anything greater so He swore by Himself.
I don't have a problem with people doing biblical research beyond what TWI approved of (right now I couldn't care less what TWI approves of or doesn't). But I refuse to speculate over whether this book in the bible is scripture and that one isn't. I'm never going to understand every word of the bible anyway. It strikes me as a waste of time to overhaul my entire belief system just because the teacher wasn't perfect.
But the "fact" that we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with that formula indicates that the force does exist. So to the extent a person is able to understand the Bible in a way that it accurately and consistently measures life ... The Word indicates that God exists.
Rhino, I think this calls for a bottle of wine and bionic gerbils for my pea brain, but if you don't mind, I'd like to play devil's advocate here.....
I don't think we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with the formulas the Bible presents. We don't always get answer to prayers. God doesn't always keep his "promises" that we read in the Bible. People throw in all these other variables and justifications for WHY it doesn't "seem" as though the Bible is telling the truth and accurately or consistently measuring life. (Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers ----- BUT that's not what the Bible says. It says IF you believe then ye SHALL receive, and that's just not the case.)
I'm hesitant to believe the Bible is the word and will of God just on the word of some men who were in a position of power to make up all the rules as they went along - whom we know rewrote history and destroyed those things they didn't necessarily agree with and those things that gave people individual, personal power instead of subjecting them to rulers (political and religious).
Actually, Mark, :) Your comments on the Unified Field Theory (which is waaaaayyyyyy beyond my understanding) seem to be reflected in the Gospel of Mary Magdalene. I haven't read it, but the "Cliff Notes" version talks about how Jesus came and gave us holy spirit and how we have all this power within us and how we're all connected one to another and everything we do impacts the lives of others and, therefore, how important it is to remember that in our day to day life. It's a more mystical, spiritual and personally empowering book on an individual level, which would have been very intimidating and threatening to those looking for absolute power over others.
Again, I fully acknowledge that you are light years ahead of me in your understanding of the churches and religious history. I'm trying to catch up and sincerely appreciate your input.
I don't think we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with the formulas the Bible presents. We don't always get answer to prayers.
Speak for yourself. You're just praying wrong. You're out of fellowship. You haven't been ABS'ing :blink: ... ummm lol Don't you have your magic eight ball ?
Well, I agree about the Bible ... maybe parts are truth, and a wiser man than I could make it all work, and heal the sick etc. My Lord gravity is a little more absolute ... but you know, who ever thought man could fly without being a god? Maybe we just aren't understanding some chaos theory here! I just like to give people that believe it the benefit of the doubt. There seems to be a lot of good in the largely Christian basis for this country ... but how much of that is from the Bible is hard to say.
Maybe I'm just arguing for fun, but I'd say experience doesn't prove or disprove the bible ... but experience (ours and others) is all we have really. Science is easy, but how do you really accurately and consistently measure how life works? If people can put a few things together and glean some truths from the Bible, maybe they are way ahead of me. Living well is maybe the best way to "figure IT out". Too much emphasis on translating estrangelo aramaic probably just leads to a false sense of superiority.
Now, wine is in the Bible ... I believe in wine ... but more the jubilee year type drinking, not a little for my stomach's sake :)
Speak for yourself. You're just praying wrong. You're out of fellowship. You haven't been ABS'ing :blink: ... ummm lol Don't you have your magic eight ball ?
BUSTED!!
You caught me. No ABS and I left my magic eight ball at home. The crystal ball has gotten foggy and my Tarot cards are lost.
Well, I agree about the Bible ... maybe parts are truth, and a wiser man than I could make it all work, and heal the sick etc. ... Maybe we just aren't understanding some chaos theory here! I just like to give people that believe it the benefit of the doubt. There seems to be a lot of good in the largely Christian basis for this country ... but how much of that is from the Bible is hard to say.
Tis true, which is why I haven't totally written off Christianity. :) Besides that, the thought of writing off God who very well may exist and who could kick my @$$ is a pretty scary thought. But also, there are very good qualities and moral values in non-Christians as well.
Maybe I'm just arguing for fun, but I'd say experience doesn't prove or disprove the bible ... but experience (ours and others) is all we have really.
Nothing wrong with that, imo. It peeves some people off to no end, but I think there's still good that can come from it. Experience is what we have, which is why I have problems struggling to understand the experiences people have where they claim to have seen God, died on the operating table and come back to life, seen angels, dead relatives, phenomena. They really believe they experienced those things....who am I to tell them they didn't just because it contradicts some book people call "The Bible"? ;)Science is easy, but how do you really accurately and consistently measure how life works? If people can put a few things together and glean some truths from the Bible, maybe they are way ahead of me. Living well is maybe the best way to "figure IT out". Too much emphasis on translating estrangelo aramaic probably just leads to a false sense of superiority.
And even science is growing these days and people are still learning new things by leaps and bounds. I agree with you on living well while trying to figure IT out. I'm tired of emphasizing the estrangelo, aramaic and other gnats.....just give me my wine - my jubilee year type wine and save me a seat next to you at the bar. :D
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
16
19
15
23
Popular Days
Jan 18
23
Jan 20
11
Jan 22
10
Jan 24
9
Top Posters In This Topic
GT 16 posts
CM 19 posts
johniam 15 posts
markomalley 23 posts
Popular Days
Jan 18 2006
23 posts
Jan 20 2006
11 posts
Jan 22 2006
10 posts
Jan 24 2006
9 posts
johniam
quote: Besides that, it's an illogical comparison and one more reason I will not engage you any further.
Yeah, well Jesus must've had plenty of "illogical comparisons". Imagine comparing the growth potential of a seed to 4 levels of spiritual commitment. Imagine comparing the most respected religious leaders in his country to whited sepulchres. Imagine comparing flying birds to God's care for his people. Imagine comparing Himself to the door of the sheep. Imagine comparing Himself to that manna which came down from heaven.
quote: Where's "the word's" driver's license? I'd like to see it.
The word IS the driver's license. It's a metaphor; a comparison by representation. VP taught what Bullinger taught about this. A similie is a comparison by resemblance (The word is like a driver's license). A metaphor is a comparison by representation (The word is a driver's license). Hypocatastasis is a comparison by implication (Driver's license!).
This isn't just in the bible. If Jim Morrison had named the song "LA is like a woman" it would have been a similie. "LA is a woman", a metaphor. But he dropped all the formalities and called it "LA Woman". Implication. He probably borrowed the logic from Burton Cummings of the Guess Who, who 1 year earlier had a hit with "American Woman". Same figure. Interestingly, Burton Cummings currently lives in LA and performs there regularly. He doesn't want the American woman's war machines or ghetto scenes, but the LA woman's money is OK.
*** Personal attack removed ***
Edited by GreasyTechLink to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
OK, thank you.
Now that we all understand metaphors, similies, and hypocatahooha, lets take the next step. Not all metaphors work. How does this one work?
This is how I see it. A drivers license is a form of ID that verifies who you are as well as numerous other things about you. Why does it verify it? Because I have several other forms of ID that I used to get it and an objective source has verified them to be legit.
So lets just say there was a time before God could drive. Where is his birth certificate, SS card, and two other forms of valid ID. I would like to make sure that his driver's license isn't a fake. Is there a water mark so to speak? I can match a face to the name on mine, always helpful. Where is his?
Do you see the problem people are having with this?
It is a metaphor that doesn't work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GT
I think I tried saying this before the figure of speech lesson came (thanks, haven't had one since TWI), but I agree with Lindy. It's an invalid metaphore.
A drivers license's sole purpose for existence is proof of identity and authorization. No such thing exist for the Bible. The author of the majority of the books isn't even known, let alone there being proof that he/she actually wrote it, wasn't making it up, lying, or was just plain mental.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: It's an invalid metaphore.
Sorry, but there are no "error messages" in god's word, nor can be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GT
Such a statement requires proof. Got any?
Otherwise, it's only a theory, or more likely, a fantasy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
the proof is confirmed when seen
the word is real when seen what it says
it's not history
it's not stories
it's the way it is
from the mind
into the mind
started with the heavens and earth
gen 1:1
the big picture ....
figure of speech? nah....
a new way of seeing what was done
and continues to this day
to see that this isn't just a story
but that which was
and is
and will be
staying cornered into
some kind of mind games and tricks
or wisdom that does not reveal
the things hidden from the beginning
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Such a statement requires proof. Got any?
I don't have to prove anything to you any more than I have to "prove" to deaf people that music exists.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GT
Then why bother posting such statements if you don't have anything to back it up?
There is a proof for deaf people to know that music exists and be able to experience it. What do you have against deaf people? If I were deaf, I would appreciate someone showing me how to experience music.
But if we were to take the non-proof route that you suggest, then a deaf person would be told that music exist but must take the person at their word. No benifit for them and they never truly know for sure, they only have your word on it. What use it then?
Stop picking of deaf people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Hey, man, I don't know who *%^#*ed in your slim fast today but it wasn't me. Interesting to note that you do not remove ALL personal attacks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GT
Someone a bit touchy today?
Point out the personal attack and I'll remove it. I really don't see it. Could it be you're just taking things a bit too personally?
I offer a logical rebutal to your post and the best you can come back with is urine contaminated slim fast?
I do believe the topic is The Word of God is the Will of God. I posit that such a statement, or any sub-statements extending it, require proof. You claim no proof is required or that any metaphor is valid as long as it has something to do with God or the Bible. I disagree. Do you wish to discuss or no?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Well, you only need one point of comparison for the metaphor to "work". "metaphor" and "point of comparison" got me this from Google...
"An important aspect of this comparison is that the two objects which are being compared are essentially dissimilar in all aspects other than the point of comparison."
So, I could guess the point could be ... I accept the Bible as proof positive like a driver's license cuz ... um ... whatever ... and I'm glad we don't use other documents to try to substantiate the validity ... cuz ... um, that would just confuse things (I actually believe that part LOL). Anyway, any one point of comparison would do ... it would be hard to say it is invalid as I see it ... unclear, poorly stated, whatever ... I guess I'm speaking up partly cuz I think it is OK to just believe the Bible cuz it was good enough for grandpa ... and considering other sources doesn't always make things clearer or better (where did it get twi?). In any case, the validity of the metaphor used isn't the issue, is it?
But here is what gets me ... a thread can be unraveled ... a train of thought can be derailed or taken off track ... but HOW DO YOU DERAIL A THREAD ????
We hear this all the time on this site, yet ... Where is the outrage?
I guess that is a mixed metaphor. But there's no point in rehashing all this, I mean, you can beat a dead horse to water... but you can't make him drink.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Here's another point about metaphors: they mostly just illustrate a point that is already established, they in no way prove the point.
For johniam, who as far as I know believes in the inerrancy of the bible, the driver's license analogy makes sense. For him, the bible is the standard against which everything else is measured. For others, who don't hold such a belief, the analogy is flawed. The bible as driver's license only works if one already accepts the premise that the bible is "right".
One of the things that I saw recur in TWI was the use of illustrations to prove the point. An example is the teaching on epiluo, which Bullinger taught was "to let loose", and illustrated the letting loose, by comparing it to dogs being unleashed to run down the game. The definition, filtered through Wierwille and later Martindale, focussed on the dogs and not the letting loose itself, establishing in TWI minds that interpretation was bad.
Another poster and I questioned the TWI definition on biblical grounds, as well as showing how Bullinger was misunderstood by Wierwille (I understand that other posters may disagree with me on this...my main problem was how TWI leaders handled the question...). Rather than "going to the Word", or going to a lexicon other some other source that would better explain the TWI position, both sets of leaders proceeded to explain the analogy, lecturing on dogs and hunting and training, etc. The example became equal to the bible!
Edited by OakspearLink to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Good point, except I don't think the point has to be established ... the metaphor is to help establish or explain the point
Again, I think the metaphor "works" since he said it. As you said, it is just to illustrate his "premise." Whether it is clear enough to convince anyone is another matter. lol I really wish I'd studied a little more logic ... but I think that is right. A perfect metaphor proves no more than a lame one.I did my research paper on structure in romans (good gawd). It mostly rehashed Bullinger ... but I remember one place at the end where VP put one verse extra in a previous section .. it made no sense ... the smart way guy I talked to said to put it the way VP said, so I toed the line ... I think VP was like a high school student cheating on his homework, changing a few things so it doesn't look identical ... Later I got a letter asking about making my paper into a article for GMIR. I thought, "holy crap" what the hell do I really know about structure of romans ... they got schoenheidt, cummins, crouch, and they want my sheeet ... they must really be hard up LOL
WOOF ... so you are saying that is when the way went to the dogs?Sometimes you have to call em like you se 'em, and let the sleeping dogs fall where they may!
Well, at least I crack myself up :)
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: For johniam, who as far as I know believes in the inerrancy of the bible, the driver's license analogy makes sense. For him, the bible is the standard against which everything else is measured. For others, who don't hold such a belief, the analogy is flawed. The bible as driver's license only works if one already accepts the premise that the bible is "right".
Yeah, it's a credibility thing. I DO believe the bible is God's "ID" just as much as a driver's license is a person's ID, but the analogy is not a 100% match.
A driver's license gives limited info to interested parties in limited situations, but it says nothing about character or virtue. The bible, on the other hand, gives much detailed info about the god it speaks of. IMO VPW did an excellent job in PFAL of making God approachable. But LCM sure fixed that, didn't he?
quote: Do you wish to discuss or no?
No. We have different belief systems and all we'll do is p*ss each other off as we already have. Feel free to hurl the last insult if you wish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Vee pee and craiggers were not allowed to make mistakes on teachings NOR on the metaphors or other examples they used in their teachings - if some TWIt questioned it (and it was wrong) then the problem then became on the TWIt's understanding of the teaching/example and not the teaching/example itself. We seem to have the same problem here. :)
It seems to me that there is no way to show someone that the word of God is the will of God without using the word of God. Therefore, it's a "take it on faith" or "just believe God" sort of thing. Blind faith doesn't sit well with me - especially knowing about the history of what books were allowed, what books may not have been and who was responsible for making those decisions.
We hear the excuse all the time that men are fallible but I don't understand why it's so hard for people who believe the Bible to be 100% God's word and completely inerrant tend to overlook that fallibility when it comes to the composition of the Bible, yet use that excuse quite frequently when it's convenient for other discussions. :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I'm just unwinding with a beer here ... but I'd say maybe you have to use gravity to prove gravity .... so if someone really could make the "original texts" fit like VP claimed, that would be fine by me :) But right, the blind faith thing can get silly ... blind atheism faith can be silly too maybe ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I don't think you can ever "prove" that the bible or "the Word of God" is actually from God. Most of what I see here and elsewhere is along the lines of "it worked for me". IT being speaking in tongues, answers to prayer, miracles, etc. It all comes down to personal experience, i.e. experiencing what the bible says that you should experience, or interpreting your experience in light of the bible.
Does that experience make the bible any more "true" than anything else? Subjectively, maybe, but lots of folks have varying experiences. All "true" in their own context, but not to others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Traditional Gravity Model:
F1,2=G(m1m2)/r21,2
Where:
G=6.6742±0.001×10-11 Nm2kg-2
m1 and m2 are the masses of the two objects in kilograms
r21,2 is the square of the distance between the two objects in meters2
and F1,2 is the attractive force between the two objects in Newtons.
So what?
(and yes, I realize that Newtonian gravity has been superceded by Unified Field Theory, but it's a lot easier to explain)
This theory requires a bunch of values (the mass of the objects; the distance between the center of the objects) in order to determine the value of the force (gravity). And keep in mind that the constant "G" was not defined for 130 years after Newton published his work!
You can't prove gravity without the two objects. You sure can't come up with the value of "G" without some precision measurement of the relationship between the two objects.
There is an interesting analogy there if you care to examine it.
Edited by markomalleyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Oh great, now I'm going to be up all night checking your math
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Ummm... I think my point was much looser ... i shouldn't have said prove, but "show" as Belle had said. I guess I'm thinking that if the Bible was absolute truth, but just needed to be understood, it would be like gravity ... just needing the proper mathematically exact understanding. I don't believe it actually fits at all exactly, but if it did, it would be the formula that always worked, if you could understand all the forces (objects?) at work in the situation. So the Bible would be the formula I guess. And life would be the two objects interacting. Maybe it is getting a little too string theory like ... which I totally don't understand, I'll stick with Newton :)
But it might depend on what you believe about "the Living Word" ... becoming flesh, being God ... all that, to try to extend the analogy.
I'm not the sharpest light bulb in the drawer, but I think you need gravity to "prove" it. The formula is just theory without the measurement of the objects. Actually the formula is just a measurement of gravity anyway, not a proof that it exists, I'm thinking ... well, I'm trying to think
And gravity is actually just a word referring to a force (OK, that's just another word) It's all so esoterical really ... 
But the "fact" that we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with that formula indicates that the force does exist. So to the extent a person is able to understand the Bible in a way that it accurately and consistently measures life ... The Word indicates that God exists.
indicates it for that person ... if "The Word" is God, then "IT" exists regardless of any measurements ... like gravity exists without our definition of it. I liked that verse .. by God all things cohere .. science just measures the forces, no inkling of how or why they exist, and no explanation of how or why life exists ... just some measurements ...
OK, the two little gerbils on the treadmill in my brain have been running full speed for a couple minutes now .... I need a break
the green part was after resting the gerbils LOL
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
You can't prove God. Remember that Henry explained the Ford, but the Ford never explained Henry? It says in Hebrews somewhere that God couldn't swear by anything greater so He swore by Himself.
I don't have a problem with people doing biblical research beyond what TWI approved of (right now I couldn't care less what TWI approves of or doesn't). But I refuse to speculate over whether this book in the bible is scripture and that one isn't. I'm never going to understand every word of the bible anyway. It strikes me as a waste of time to overhaul my entire belief system just because the teacher wasn't perfect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Rhino, I think this calls for a bottle of wine and bionic gerbils for my pea brain, but if you don't mind, I'd like to play devil's advocate here.....
I don't think we can accurately & consistently measure this Lord gravity force with the formulas the Bible presents. We don't always get answer to prayers. God doesn't always keep his "promises" that we read in the Bible. People throw in all these other variables and justifications for WHY it doesn't "seem" as though the Bible is telling the truth and accurately or consistently measuring life. (Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers ----- BUT that's not what the Bible says. It says IF you believe then ye SHALL receive, and that's just not the case.)
I'm hesitant to believe the Bible is the word and will of God just on the word of some men who were in a position of power to make up all the rules as they went along - whom we know rewrote history and destroyed those things they didn't necessarily agree with and those things that gave people individual, personal power instead of subjecting them to rulers (political and religious).
Actually, Mark, :) Your comments on the Unified Field Theory (which is waaaaayyyyyy beyond my understanding) seem to be reflected in the Gospel of Mary Magdalene. I haven't read it, but the "Cliff Notes" version talks about how Jesus came and gave us holy spirit and how we have all this power within us and how we're all connected one to another and everything we do impacts the lives of others and, therefore, how important it is to remember that in our day to day life. It's a more mystical, spiritual and personally empowering book on an individual level, which would have been very intimidating and threatening to those looking for absolute power over others.
Again, I fully acknowledge that you are light years ahead of me in your understanding of the churches and religious history. I'm trying to catch up and sincerely appreciate your input.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Speak for yourself. You're just praying wrong. You're out of fellowship. You haven't been ABS'ing :blink: ... ummm lol Don't you have your magic eight ball ?
Well, I agree about the Bible ... maybe parts are truth, and a wiser man than I could make it all work, and heal the sick etc. My Lord gravity is a little more absolute ... but you know, who ever thought man could fly without being a god? Maybe we just aren't understanding some chaos theory here! I just like to give people that believe it the benefit of the doubt. There seems to be a lot of good in the largely Christian basis for this country ... but how much of that is from the Bible is hard to say.
Maybe I'm just arguing for fun, but I'd say experience doesn't prove or disprove the bible ... but experience (ours and others) is all we have really. Science is easy, but how do you really accurately and consistently measure how life works? If people can put a few things together and glean some truths from the Bible, maybe they are way ahead of me. Living well is maybe the best way to "figure IT out". Too much emphasis on translating estrangelo aramaic probably just leads to a false sense of superiority.
Now, wine is in the Bible ... I believe in wine ... but more the jubilee year type drinking, not a little for my stomach's sake :)
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
You caught me. No ABS and I left my magic eight ball at home. The crystal ball has gotten foggy and my Tarot cards are lost.
Tis true, which is why I haven't totally written off Christianity. :) Besides that, the thought of writing off God who very well may exist and who could kick my @$$ is a pretty scary thought. But also, there are very good qualities and moral values in non-Christians as well.
Nothing wrong with that, imo. It peeves some people off to no end, but I think there's still good that can come from it. Experience is what we have, which is why I have problems struggling to understand the experiences people have where they claim to have seen God, died on the operating table and come back to life, seen angels, dead relatives, phenomena. They really believe they experienced those things....who am I to tell them they didn't just because it contradicts some book people call "The Bible"? ;)Science is easy, but how do you really accurately and consistently measure how life works? If people can put a few things together and glean some truths from the Bible, maybe they are way ahead of me. Living well is maybe the best way to "figure IT out". Too much emphasis on translating estrangelo aramaic probably just leads to a false sense of superiority.And even science is growing these days and people are still learning new things by leaps and bounds. I agree with you on living well while trying to figure IT out.
I'm tired of emphasizing the estrangelo, aramaic and other gnats.....just give me my wine - my jubilee year type wine and save me a seat next to you at the bar. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.