Why are Church and State to be Separated?

Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 8:54 pm

Hi SVzurich

Yes its really excellent predestination its like a nail in the lid if the Christian coffin, well done Mr Calvin you single handedly got rid of any need for the church (wouldnt it be bummer if he wasnt one of the predestined hehe).

Squidge

Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:52 pm

Howdy yourself Squidge! Very Happy

Not sure if I greeted ya earlier, but consider yourself officially greeted now! Smile

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 16, 2008 Posts: 81

Hi Cygnus, Squidge & SVZurich!

To answer your question Cygnus, No, he didn't consider himself a Calvinist.

His line was that our human understanding of god was very limited, "thru a glass darkly", if you will. He also counselled his congregation to, "believe in the Lord and lean not to thine [their]own understanding". As far as he was concerned god gives us free will and knows our choices beforehand. This was the same line taken by Missionary in the thread, "Free Will" back in July and August. Just because it was a contradictory statement didn't mean that god wasn't capable of it.

Of course. this is just rubbish. Rolling Eyes

It destroys the very meaning of the language we are using to discuss these concepts - leaving us worse off than before.

Thanks for the Grodem quote Squidge.

The catch is that speculation like this carries no weight. That's all it is - speculation. Surely using it to bolster your faith is a risky exercise? Especially when you are discussing the eternal fate of unborn children?

Now, in my first message I said that my ex-pastor's arguments didn't hold water. Here's how.

1. Logical argument from tried and tested facts is fine. Logical argument from a song of praise written over two thousand years ago, copied and re-copied and then translated into modern English is less so. Saying the bible is god's perfect word and all that it contains is trustworthy and true is an unverified statement of faith. If even one imperfection is found this statement is proven to be false. Being false any logical argument taken from the bible is therefore suspect. See, "Another day - another bible contradiction" for more on this.

2. If we accept that, A the bible is god's word, though imperfectly written down by men. And, B the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth, taking us past the human imperfections to the perfect truth beyond... there are two faults with this line of reasoning.
Firstly, you have to invoke an invisible, intangible and undetectable agency that works thru your consciousness to show you the proper meaning of the bible's words. Anything undetectable * is unprovable and belongs in the realm of specualtion, not fact and so has no place in a logical argument.
Secondly, any information about this undetectable agency originates within the pages of the bible. So you are using circular reasoning to support your argument. Again, this is invalid in logical argument.
Either way, if the bible is claimed to be perfect or imperfect, the mechanisms needed to support the pastor's arguments about the eternal fate of unborn children remain invalid.

3. What about the contextual problem of verse 15?
What is this secret place under the earth? One verse talks of the writer being knitted together in his mother's womb and the other speaks about his frame not being hidden from god under the earth. Does it literally mean that he was conceived and grew while his mother was living in a cave? If so, then the meaning of this psalm applies only to the writer and not to other people. Using it to describe the fate of all unborn children is then completely wrong.

This highlights the many traps and pitfalls of taking a literal approach to what the bible says. Also, if we say that some parts of the bible are meant to be taken literally and others poetically, symbolically or metaphysically, we are left with the question, "How do we know when to read the words literally and when not?" Invoking the holy spirit as a guide in this matter is no solution either, for reasons already discussed.

As you can see folks, I've completely rejected these arguments as false.

* Note:
Creation scientists and other christian fundamentalists often complain that cosmologists and particle physicists are guilty of invoking "undetectable" and "unmeasurable" energy fields when talking about the Big Bang, other dimensions and Multiple Universes. My reply to them is that there are usually sound mathematical and logical reasons for doing so.

Invoking the equally undetectable and unmeasurable holy spirit is far less valid. Not only is circular reasoning involved but logic is rarely (if ever) involved in their arguments.

Thanks,

BornAgainAthiest.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore