Defending the Bible and issues of faith

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Tiassa, Oct 23, 2002.

?

Do problems arise when one portion of faith is forsaken to reconcile another issue?

  1. Yes

    1 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. No

    1 vote(s)
    33.3%
  3. Maybe

    1 vote(s)
    33.3%
  1. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,891
    I had started looking around for an old feminist assertion that the Pauline evangelism speaks against marriage (what, with the End Times so close at hand) but I haven't been able to find it.

    Oh, well.

    But while perusing articles I was struck by an epiphany of sorts.

    Every now and then, I'm known to frustrate people by drawing their assertions to seemingly-wild conclusions. Typically, I remind people that they must be cautious that their issue-specific position does not violate their larger faith.

    As such, I came across a preacher who apparently does not believe that the Bible is definitive.

    Which is a touchy subject in itself. We hear much about the Bible, including the assertions that it is the complete and true word of God.

    Does this position hold? H. Wayne House, addressing accusations of misogyny in the Pauline evangelism, makes a startling assertion:
    In our modern cynicism, we can, of course, imagine the fat misogynist with plenty of mistresses subjecting themselves to sexual indignity for "love". He loves women, you know.

    But we can move past that image, and instead look to a scriptural discussion cited by Mr. House:
    Now then, someone help me out, please:

    • Portions of the Bible are rejected on critical grounds.

    or

    • Portions of the complete and true Word of God are rejected on critical grounds.

    Certes, Mr. House might be able to construct a fluent and even brilliant argument based on that premise, but throughout will persist the rejection of various parts of the Word of God on "critical" grounds. Now, admittedly, liberal Christian theology does try to cloak itself in common-sense, but look at what happens to faith.

    Were Mr. House to introduce the argument into a Sciforums debate, I would likely call him out on the weakening of the faith platform and seek an explanation.

    However, Mr. House is not here, so ....

    At any rate: two primary issues--

    • This is what I mean when I chide people about undermining their general faith for specific issues.
    • Anyone want to try to reconcile the "critical" rejection of portions of the Bible?

    enjoy,
    Tiassa

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page