tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post3046257312480241110..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: Schenck the ModernKen Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-32443304606946132042010-04-12T11:40:26.020-04:002010-04-12T11:40:26.020-04:00You are of course perfectly correct, but the Bible...You are of course perfectly correct, but the Bible doesn't explicitly say a lot of things we believe, having arrived at them by reason or experience.<br /><br />However, don't you sometimes think that creation is a graphic representation of spiritual truth. That physical seeds which grow to feed and nourish us are in some way <i>intended</i> to point us to the way God's Word does this spiritually? The alternative is that the metaphors are simply grasped as handy examples which might well have been otherwise.cawoodmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02108527908963003806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-51638360100273669592010-04-12T06:49:58.843-04:002010-04-12T06:49:58.843-04:00Quite right that the OT also expresses God's r...Quite right that the OT also expresses God's relationship with Israel in terms of the metaphor of marriage (Hosea also). But these verses are expressed as metaphors and Israel certainly would have experienced them as metaphors built on the normal use in normal life. <br /><br />It remains the case nonetheless that the Bible never says that God created human marriage as a metaphor for God's relationship with his people. It is always worded the other way around, with God's relationship with His people being like the relationship between a man and a woman. To state the opposite is to "read into" the nature of reality.<br /><br />Now that doesn't necessarily mean that such individuals are wrong--only that they should not think the idea comes from the Bible.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-80795342005385173532010-04-12T03:31:52.396-04:002010-04-12T03:31:52.396-04:00The metaphor of God being betrothed to his people ...The metaphor of God being betrothed to his people runs right through the Bible and is surely the most intimate and shocking images of the relationship in the OT: <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2050:1;54:4;%20Jeremiah%203:8" rel="nofollow">Isaiah 50:1;54:4; Jeremiah 3:8</a>cawoodmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02108527908963003806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-23655413561233281492010-04-11T17:02:12.202-04:002010-04-11T17:02:12.202-04:00I am not arguing from a Cartesian view...thinking,...I am not arguing from a Cartesian view...thinking, therefore I am...<br /><br />You argue, as a Wesleyan, from a "I am, because I do" (character, as defined by virtue). That is an empirical and verifying of faith claims. I just don't want to "perform" for entrance into the "in group" (a Christian), because I believe that evaluations of this type are not according to the "ideals" of a liberal democracy, but an autocratic governing of other human beings.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-85596626348177053152010-04-11T16:57:14.044-04:002010-04-11T16:57:14.044-04:00No, the existence of God can only be held by faith...No, the existence of God can only be held by faith, after embracing agnosticism, as a critical realist. Most embrace God, as a critical idealist in the Christian world (if I am understanding the terms correctly).Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-13074570254361586472010-04-11T15:12:29.210-04:002010-04-11T15:12:29.210-04:00Angie, Taylor is actually building a case against ...Angie, Taylor is actually building a case against Cartesian Enlightenment, so 1) I am interested to hear his critique and 2) a chastened modernist epistemology or a critical realist epistemology does not preclude the existence of God.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-29955722918811479082010-04-11T14:51:43.282-04:002010-04-11T14:51:43.282-04:00BTW, there is no agreement over whether there is a...BTW, there is no agreement over whether there is a absolute "reality" in regards to abstract math...does this math describe the "real world of God's order", or is it a social construct of scientist as he investigates the world.<br /><br />Because there are a number of theories that can describe the same thing when it comes to "science", then I would think that man constructs these theories to describe the "realities" of science.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-34236891143392969752010-04-11T14:47:58.655-04:002010-04-11T14:47:58.655-04:00Thanks for this post, as it leaves little room to ...Thanks for this post, as it leaves little room to manuever when it comes to historical progress.<br /><br />The question in regards to science today is what is a human being. That is, at least in my opinion, a complex and difficult question that one has to ask if it is like asking "Who or What is God".<br /><br />The physical aspects of man and his needs are universal, this is true, but is this all that makes for the 'human"? <br /><br />When one comes to the higer needs of "man", then we find potetialities, and choice/decisions. These can only be met within a liberal democracy, which the Enlightenment wrought. And the "moral government" is a government that protects the higher values of human liberty in life and one's pursuit of happiness.<br /><br />I read somewhere that the conflict over the Epicurean and Stoic ideas are what underlie the conflict over how we understand liberal democracy today. <br /><br />Stoicism defines the Christian faith, as faith believes in "god" controlling events or in purposes, etc.. But, I believe I read where Thomas Jefferson's view tended more toward the Epicurean, where the empirical evidence is against such belief..<br /><br />I am reading "The Science of Liberty" by Timothy Ferris that argues for the modern position.<br /><br />In liberal democracies, man has developed morally, apart from spiritually defined models of ethics. And the "end" of such development is constitutional government that protects liberty, so that humans may have choice of value.<br /><br />Authoritarian regimes, whether political or religious will not do service to man's need to choose and develop his own goals for his own good, as well as society's.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-40837073811723009152010-04-11T13:49:42.388-04:002010-04-11T13:49:42.388-04:00You did your homework! ;-)You did your homework! ;-)Keith Druryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05058949281404407630noreply@blogger.com