Posted by PS on December 04, 2003 at 20:02:03:
In Reply to: My last post on this thread. :) posted by Bob - the Alien on December 04, 2003 at 19:14:05:
: My last response to all of this is really not to your post, but to Steve's, when he said:
: "The shoddy scholarship represented in some of these "answers" is impossible to defend in a scholarly environment, where people really KNOW things that can be proved without reference to faith claims, and the church just calls the opposing views the deception of the devil. It is a tragic comedy (a comedic tragedy?)"
: By following this concept too far, nothing will ever be accepted as true. This has gone so far down the 'scholarly' path, that all belief systems will be rejected without scholarly proof.
Not true! Nor is it representative of what I said--it is a decontextualization and distortion. First, I am a scholar on the "scholarly" path you mention, and I happen to be a believer, as are many of my peers and betters, and our faith stands the test of its purification, and grows ever stronger. I never said that faith must be proved! I am a believer NOT because of scholarly evidence, I promise you. Second, I was speaking of MAN-MADE theological answers to tough questions that are accepted because they work, not because God gave them. Go reread the original context. If some of our beliefs which are solely the creations of men could be proved in error or not in harmony with what Jesus taught, they shouldn't be part of my faith claim, and I for one would not pollute my ever-growing love of Jesus with them. What do we need added lies incorporated in our truth for? Can the church who added them take us to heaven? Is our faith in the church? Not mine. I follow Jesus and His Word in the Bible, not the church, and certainly not the doctrines that are proved to have ignoble and ungodly origins.