NO JATFLA,
It's your interpretation of the scriptures; not the scriptures themselves! Therein lies the difference. It's easy to read the Bible literally; it's more difficult to read the Bible seriously, and more than literally. There is no way of deciding among those different means of imagining what lies beyond death. Nor can one resolve this by believing on way or the other. Of course, one may believe what one wishes, but believing that such and such is the case has nothing to do with whether it really is that way. The different visions cancel each other out, even as they also join in a symphony affirming "moreness".
We live in God. We move in God. We have our being in God. And wh...

NO JATFLA,
It's your interpretation of the scriptures; not the scriptures themselves! Therein lies the difference. It's easy to read the Bible literally; it's more difficult to read the Bible seriously, and more than literally. There is no way of deciding among those different means of imagining what lies beyond death. Nor can one resolve this by believing on way or the other. Of course, one may believe what one wishes, but believing that such and such is the case has nothing to do with whether it really is that way. The different visions cancel each other out, even as they also join in a symphony affirming "moreness".
We live in God. We move in God. We have our being in God. And when we die, we do not die into nothingness; we die into God.
Salvation is "the dream of God." It is a dream for the Earth. It is a dream for us. It is about the transformation of life, indivdually and together, here and now. It is the world that the prophets dreamed of--a world of distributive justice in which everybody hs enough, in which war is no more, and in which nobody need be afraid. It is not simply a political dream, but God's dream, a dream that can be realized only by our being grounded ever more deeply in the God whose heart is justice.

I doubt you can show me anything in Augustine or Athanasius that denies truth inherent in scripture. They had zero skepticism about truth and the reliability of obvious interpretation. Jesus said he "came to bear witness to the truth". It is not that difficult. Too often people want to find in scripture something that will fit their idea of how God is. There can be no uncertainty about truth if you seek to have a faith. Debbyski's self-refutation makes this clear. Can faith save you if your faith is in platitudes and false assumptions? Christian salvation is when accurate knowledged is combined with trust in the evidence. Jesus can save only when you put your trust in Him, and understand wha...

I doubt you can show me anything in Augustine or Athanasius that denies truth inherent in scripture. They had zero skepticism about truth and the reliability of obvious interpretation. Jesus said he "came to bear witness to the truth". It is not that difficult. Too often people want to find in scripture something that will fit their idea of how God is. There can be no uncertainty about truth if you seek to have a faith. Debbyski's self-refutation makes this clear. Can faith save you if your faith is in platitudes and false assumptions? Christian salvation is when accurate knowledged is combined with trust in the evidence. Jesus can save only when you put your trust in Him, and understand what you are trusting him to do. Platitudes are not helpful in this understanding, because it is basic. Our faith must be properly placed in what is true, and we must believe it to be so. If there is not truth, then there is no possibility of Christian faith. If you're a Christian that believes there is no truth, then you are not a Christian. All Deebyski is promoting is some postmodern rendition of watered-down Christianity that is in effect useless. Perhaps this is why Jesus had more to say about truth than he did about faith. If Jesus was so dedicated to the truth, how can any follower of His deny there is truth in the way Jesus understood it?

Augustine's view of scripture is a lot more sophisticated than you give him credit for. Augustine thinks scripture is to be read figuratively. Please note that a figurative reading is not the same thing as an "unclear" reading. For example: he definitely doesn't imagine that the world was created in six days. He thinks the Genesis account of creation is intended to be didactic and to teach us something about who God is, not about the physical creation of the cosmos.
I don't understand what you mean by this sentence:

Also, I am sure any prose on the trinity or periphreal concepts would be intrepreted in an unclear way.

But I can assure you that the De trinitate offers a...

Augustine's view of scripture is a lot more sophisticated than you give him credit for. Augustine thinks scripture is to be read figuratively. Please note that a figurative reading is not the same thing as an "unclear" reading. For example: he definitely doesn't imagine that the world was created in six days. He thinks the Genesis account of creation is intended to be didactic and to teach us something about who God is, not about the physical creation of the cosmos.
I don't understand what you mean by this sentence:

Also, I am sure any prose on the trinity or periphreal concepts would be intrepreted in an unclear way.

But I can assure you that the De trinitate offers a cautious approach to Scripture, a healthy appreciation for wonder and mystery, and an overall view on the relationship between Godhead and the perceiving subject that -- given what you've said up to now -- you'd probably be tempted to call "postmodern" and "PC" if you didn't know it was Augustine talking. Read the ninth book.

Your nature of your belief is not instructive to any fact about the nature of the truth

Your truth, Wilhelm? Again, it is your interpretation of Scripture.

I look forward to having about having serious discussions with you without all the arrogance and insignificant platitudes

Are you going to show up for this discussion? Because leaving arrogance out is impossible if you do. Listen, alot of America has a very negative view of fundamentalists. They regularly characterize them as anti-intellectual, literalistic, self-righteous, judgemental, and bigoted.
The purpose of this post is not to insult or enflame, but to describe the effects of the most v...

Your nature of your belief is not instructive to any fact about the nature of the truth

Your truth, Wilhelm? Again, it is your interpretation of Scripture.

I look forward to having about having serious discussions with you without all the arrogance and insignificant platitudes

Are you going to show up for this discussion? Because leaving arrogance out is impossible if you do. Listen, alot of America has a very negative view of fundamentalists. They regularly characterize them as anti-intellectual, literalistic, self-righteous, judgemental, and bigoted.
The purpose of this post is not to insult or enflame, but to describe the effects of the most visible and vocal form of comtemporary Christianity in American life and in the America church today. I recognize that there are many good and gentle people in congregations of the Christian right who love God and Jesus. But their theological and political attitudes are shaped by the most visible and vocal among them. This is what I am dismayed about.
I would emphasize compassion, justice and peace as the central virtues of Christian life. I believe the Bible's passion is for justice and peace and to take seriously God's passion for the World.

Debbyski, You obviously did not seek to understand my comment. Come down to my level. I speak in very clear terms. It seems to me you are content with your logically flawed self-refuting stance. Further, I am not interested in the machinations of the leftist, anti-christian, secular-humanists. What they think matters little to me, so you are wasting your time throwing out meaningless words like fundamentalist.
One of the tragedies of our time is that the Church has been infected by the emerging post-modern culture while it has honorably adapted it's message to reach those segments. The Church has sacrificed a lot in doing so, and risks losing much more. And know for sure this concept is no...

Debbyski, You obviously did not seek to understand my comment. Come down to my level. I speak in very clear terms. It seems to me you are content with your logically flawed self-refuting stance. Further, I am not interested in the machinations of the leftist, anti-christian, secular-humanists. What they think matters little to me, so you are wasting your time throwing out meaningless words like fundamentalist.
One of the tragedies of our time is that the Church has been infected by the emerging post-modern culture while it has honorably adapted it's message to reach those segments. The Church has sacrificed a lot in doing so, and risks losing much more. And know for sure this concept is not foreign to the enemies of Christianity.
The fact that you see truth as "my truth" and "your truth" shows you do not believe in truth. (If you are interested I'll be happy to email you a complete outline on truth, foundations, belief and justification. This is a much broader topic than this forum allows.
The current skepticism about truth has been inserted in our culture by relativist dogma. It is a grossly flawed philosophy of man promoted by materialists and relativists. You and they suggest truth is not knowable. That it is subjective, different for everybody. But it is not and that is a propositional fact! You deny the very existence of truth if you hold what you propose. Also as you have shown so clearly, the concept is rediculously self-refuting.
Yours is a nihilistic philosophy of man, which denies what is essential to Christianity. I used to fall for these spiritual traps. Years of study, thought, reason, prayer, and counsel with authorities has changed my direction to a more intellectual and foundational respect for the word of God. Now you can think I am wrong, and that is fine. Just because I could be wrong does not mean it is reasonable to think that I am. Hopefully you are open to the same understanding of reason and ask yourself that question.

Wilhelm,
The only way to avoid uncritical subjectivity is through critical thinking, not only about the view of others but also about one's own. This does not mean that "truth" is the function of majority opinion; the majority can be and too often has been wrong, in matters both trivial and great. I am also concerned that what I have said may sound judgmental. Ultimate judgment about everything is God's business, not ours. My truth, is of course, is but one possible truth. There are many other contemporary scholarly sketches, ranging from the wildly improbable to the equally plausible.
For me, to take Jesus seriously is to follow him. To follow him is to participate in his passion. An...

Wilhelm,
The only way to avoid uncritical subjectivity is through critical thinking, not only about the view of others but also about one's own. This does not mean that "truth" is the function of majority opinion; the majority can be and too often has been wrong, in matters both trivial and great. I am also concerned that what I have said may sound judgmental. Ultimate judgment about everything is God's business, not ours. My truth, is of course, is but one possible truth. There are many other contemporary scholarly sketches, ranging from the wildly improbable to the equally plausible.
For me, to take Jesus seriously is to follow him. To follow him is to participate in his passion. And his passion was God and the kingdom of God. To me, Christianity is a "way" to be followed more than it is about a set of beliefs to be believed.
Having said that, I truly am happy (and I mean that) that you feel you have found "your way", even though we do not agree.
We are all part of an unending conversation (especially on clipmarks). The conversation began long before we were born, and it will continue long after we're gone. The conversation is about life itself--about what is real, what's worth paying attention to, how we should live and what "this" is all about. So also for those of us who are Christians. We are all involved in the unending conversation about Jesus. The terms of the conversation change over time and from one cultural setting to another. Indeed, for Christians, the unending conversation about Jesus is the most important conversation there is. He is for me, the decisive revelation of God--of what can be seen in God's character and passion in a human life.

I never said truth is majority opinion. In fact, I am one of a select few at CM that does not believe this is so. Just check out my comments on global warming clips. I wish you would read more clearly my comments. They do actually mean something. This is an extremely important issue in our time. Truth has nothing to do with majority opinion. Each individual thinks they are right about what they believe or they would not believe it. If belief alone could make something true, there would be no difference between believe and make-believe.Incidently, when you say you believe something, you are saying that which you believe is true. Aristotle said about truth. If you say it is and it is, that's ...

I never said truth is majority opinion. In fact, I am one of a select few at CM that does not believe this is so. Just check out my comments on global warming clips. I wish you would read more clearly my comments. They do actually mean something. This is an extremely important issue in our time. Truth has nothing to do with majority opinion. Each individual thinks they are right about what they believe or they would not believe it. If belief alone could make something true, there would be no difference between believe and make-believe.Incidently, when you say you believe something, you are saying that which you believe is true. Aristotle said about truth. If you say it is and it is, that's true. If you say that it isn't and it is, that is false. Ask yourself: "what is the justification my belief". Don't listen to silly new-age renditions of biblical truths, just because they appeal to you. Ask the hard questions and accept the hard realities, avoid the epidemic of equivocation in today's false teachers, and never assume some personal message is revealed in the BIble. Only when you are correctly informed by God's word the way it was written, in contrext, will you be transformed by it. Is it reasonable to think you are wrong?

Believe me, I have studied the justification for my beliefs for several years including a way of seeing Jesus shaped by historical scholarship. It's not silly, and it's not new-age renditions of biblical truths. It's not through a doctrinal lens. It's not literal-factual which comes in harder and softer forms, and it's not about believing changed from trust and reality to believing that. It's about scripture, it's history, and it's wisdom--and we impoverish ourselves if we do not pay attention to its detailed particularity. But it's not complicated; at it's center is Jesus, whose passion was God, the way and the kingdom.
This has been a interesting debate Wilhelm; and an u...

Believe me, I have studied the justification for my beliefs for several years including a way of seeing Jesus shaped by historical scholarship. It's not silly, and it's not new-age renditions of biblical truths. It's not through a doctrinal lens. It's not literal-factual which comes in harder and softer forms, and it's not about believing changed from trust and reality to believing that. It's about scripture, it's history, and it's wisdom--and we impoverish ourselves if we do not pay attention to its detailed particularity. But it's not complicated; at it's center is Jesus, whose passion was God, the way and the kingdom.
This has been a interesting debate Wilhelm; and an unending conversation. Quoting American scholar Kenneth Burke:

The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress.