PDA

View Full Version : Liar, Lunatic or Lord


andrewlittle
04-01-2007, 11:12 PM
Responding to Djangojava from this post.
http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showpost.php?p=24193&postcount=25

The problem I have is when people start telling me I'm intolerant and that I have or believe a message of hate. Or that they know God and then they just make up crap. I've chosen to believe God and take Him at His Word.
Aren't you all just making up God? Aren't you just saying stuff? What is the basis of your belief?
What has God told you - shown you - revealed to you? And God as "Him" - is that complete with the physical attributes male humans have. If so, is that not idolatry - visioning God in your own image?

We all "make up" God - because we cannot have a direct, absolute knowledge of God. We each chose what basis we use for the understanding we can have, and pray that we don't turn our understanding into a graven image. So we understand God in terms of what we can grasp.

So to your questions - No! No! I am a Christian who believes that the Scripture reveals God incompletely to humans, because we cannot conceive of the immensity of God's being in toto. I believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit. I also believe I am being a bit of jack-ass for even answering your questions - who are you to ask me to qualify my beliefs. What makes you the arbiter of who is and who isn't a Christian?

Jesus Christ did exist and you have only 3 choices. 1) He was a well intended madman, a lunatic, and simply must be written off as such. 2) He was a cruel liar and led generatios to their death and his legacy continues to lead his followers in other countries to death. Christians are still persecuted and killed. 3) He was who he said he was.
You left out quite a few - did I say few - a lot of other possibilities. But, no matter - I believe Jesus is who he said he is.

It's an interesting, and not unusual, argument style. Two absolutely moronic options (from your perspective) and a third that you believe to be correct. There are a myriad possibilities of who people think Christ is (I prefer that to the past tense, BTW). Lousy rhetoric reflects poorly on the user, not the person answering.
I've chosen option 3 ...
boy, I didn't see that coming.
...and I don't have the luxury of making up God out of my imagination.
So you have seen God, touched God, have physical evidence of God, do you? Pray tell, what does God look like, feel like, smell like? How tall? How wide?
Faith takes imagination. No imagination leaves one only believing in the physical reality around them. Is what you are really saying that you don't use your own imagination to envision God, but rely solely on the imagination of someone else?
We really don't have a basis upon which to talk. I hold to Scripture and you don't.
Wild assumption.
But don't tell me that what Jesus Christ does and doesn't do. When is the last time you studied what he said? Do you hold your thoughts captive to Him or do you bend him to your convienance.
I study it daily. I spent five years full-time studying it.
True Biblical Christianity is very inconvienant.
True Biblical Christianity - why don't you define that for us. There is no such thing as Biblical "Christianity" - I am surprised an Inerrantist doesn't know that. The word is not in the Bible. It is a later construct. Put it all together and it is an oxymoron.

Believe what you want about Scripture, that it's just made up... that man is a poor conduit... I've chosen to believe that the God who could raise Lazarus from the dead, make a universe, and create man, the space & time... I've chosen to believe that God knows a few more things than I do and I don't have to understand what he says. I'm better off obeying those things that are clear in Scripture rather than re-writing scripture.

Just don't call yourself a Christian or claim you know Christ that's all.

The druidic buddhist... yeah whatever. It's like the old asian menus one from column A one from column B... what are the odds of that being true?

Truth by it's very nature is absolute and it may not be understood but it can be accepted by faith and even that faith is a gift of God. May He reveal Himself to you.
As for the rest of this - I am sure glad you didn't come here intolerant or hate filled. You might have said something intolerant or hateful, otherwise.

nmwolfboy
04-02-2007, 11:10 AM
And the hammer meets the nail's head, spot on!! :applause::agree:

Andy, have i told you lately that i love reading your posts?

Pax :dove:
scott

scott snedeker
04-02-2007, 09:27 PM
Each time one of these fundies get on we get better at defining our own entitlement to eschew hate. pretty soon they won't have a chance!

Daniel
04-02-2007, 10:21 PM
Andy- I can only find one word to describe your post above.

mag·is·te·ri·al
adj.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of a master or teacher; authoritative: a magisterial account of the history of the English language.

Out of the ball park buddy!

u-dog
04-03-2007, 07:07 AM
I'm just as smart as HE is !!! If you keep pumping up his ego like this he will be IMPOSSIBLE TO LIVE WITH. Already his head barely fits through the door! << ;) >>>

andrewlittle
04-03-2007, 08:59 AM
I'm just as smart as HE is !!! If you keep pumping up his ego like this he will be IMPOSSIBLE TO LIVE WITH. Already his head barely fits through the door! << ;) >>>

Love you, too, man!

I wish I could take credit for the above, but it must have been one of the other people who live in my head who made it readable. I wrote the first response, which then had to be redacted by some nefarious alter-ego because it displayed my usual caustic bile.

Emproph
04-03-2007, 09:55 AM
Scripture... I've chosen to believe that the God who could raise Lazarus from the dead, make a universe, and create man, the space & time... I've chosen to believe that God knows a few more things than I do and I don't have to understand what he says. I'm better off obeying those things that are clear in Scripture rather than re-writing scripture.

Correct me if I’m wrong Andrew, but I think what you’re asking – in a roundabout way – is that if God made the illusion of circular logic, how do we now make it spiral? In other words, how do we ‘eternify’ it?

Eternify the ultimate truth in the mindset of man requires spiral logic. Similar to circular in consistency, but never backwards.

Must we use the Bible itself to render the Bible itself harmless? It appears that we do. It also appears that there's an opening in this circular 'logic' that we're missing, or better, that we're not spiraling.

andrewlittle
04-03-2007, 10:04 AM
Correct me if I’m wrong Andrew, but I think what you’re asking – in a roundabout way – is that if God made the illusion of circular logic, how do we now make it spiral? In other words, how do we ‘eternify’ it?

Eternify the ultimate truth in the mindset of man requires spiral logic. Similar to circular in consistency, but never backwards.

Must we use the Bible itself to render the Bible itself harmless? It appears that we do. It also appears that there's an opening in this circular 'logic' that we're missing, or better, that we're not spiraling.

I'm not sure to what you're referring in regard to what I said. Could you help out by giving me a quote that I made? You quoted Djangojava. The thoughts seem interesting, but I need a little unpacking.

Thanks Emproph,
Andy

Emproph
04-03-2007, 10:34 AM
I'm not sure to what you're referring in regard to what I said. Could you help out by giving me a quote that I made? You quoted Djangojava. The thoughts seem interesting, but I need a little unpacking.

I was going out of my way to NOT make fun of Dj's circular logic by cavalierly describing it as God's design...:eek: :lol:

To then take that Perfect "logic" (circular) to it's productive end would mean that God's true perfect logic must be spiral.

Just trying to make my philosophical case and stay inconspicuous by attributing it to you.

I was taking Djangojava's logic to it's logical end, the implication being that any and all complaints about that circular logic would be indicative of what you posted, and potentially offer solutions (of 'counter' logic) for the future.

I guess I was trying to say that logic is an open ended spiral and the only reason that circular logic is so attractive is because it has all the similarities of the consistency of spiral logic except for the opening.

Djangojava
04-03-2007, 02:56 PM
I've never done one of these discussions so I didn't know about things having different threads and such. So hopefully I'm on a more appropriate one. Sorry for mucking up the other thread. I realize now that it was inappropriate to say the least.

Liar Lunatic Lord...

andrewlittle said:

It's an interesting, and not unusual, argument style. Two absolutely moronic options (from your perspective) and a third that you believe to be correct. There are a myriad possibilities of who people think Christ is (I prefer that to the past tense, BTW). Lousy rhetoric reflects poorly on the user, not the person answering.

C.S. Lewis is famously quoted as posing the Liar, Lunatic, or Lord options. He certainly was no moron. If there are other options why don't you suggest some? There is only one more. You can say the writings are false.

But since you made the statement, [I]"There are a myriad possibilities of who people think Christ is ...I]

I'm curious as to the myriad. Can you name a few that don't make Christ out to be a liar or a lunatic when you extend them to their logical conclusion?

andrewlittle
04-03-2007, 08:17 PM
I've never done one of these discussions so I didn't know about things having different threads and such. So hopefully I'm on a more appropriate one. Sorry for mucking up the other thread. I realize now that it was inappropriate to say the least.
There’s a learning curve for everything. You should have seen my first few posts – talk about disasters. You seem to be doing quite well.

When I said:
It's an interesting, and not unusual, argument style. Two absolutely moronic options (from your perspective) and a third that you believe to be correct. There are a myriad possibilities of who people think Christ is (I prefer that to the past tense, BTW). Lousy rhetoric reflects poorly on the user, not the person answering.
You responded:
C.S. Lewis is famously quoted as posing the Liar, Lunatic, or Lord options. He certainly was no moron. If there are other options why don't you suggest some? There is only one more. You can say the writings are false.
I wasn’t likening you to a moron, although I can see why it may appear so. You chose three options, two of which it would be moronic for someone to pick because they are, in your mind, just plain wrong. BTW, they are wrong in my book, too. The third then is “the right answer”, but in reality says nothing about who or what you believe Jesus to be.

The form of the answer is nebulous at best, however. It really doesn’t say anything, but you use it as a trump card. Jesus is who Jesus says he is. For me that is a given. What I don’t agree with necessarily is the Jesus is who YOU say he is. Who do you say Jesus is – what do you use to make that distinction. I can’t know that, however, because you didn’t say one blessed word about that.

But since you made the statement, "There are a myriad possibilities of who people think Christ is ...

I'm curious as to the myriad. Can you name a few that don't make Christ out to be a liar or a lunatic when you extend them to their logical conclusion?

Actually any statement at all is part of the myriad, since in the posts leading up to this you stated nothing whatsoever about Jesus. To say Jesus is the incarnation of God is, in and of itself, far more than you have said. To say Jesus died for our salvation, likewise. You stated nothing about Jesus other than:
Jesus Christ did exist and you have only 3 choices. 1) He was a well intended madman, a lunatic, and simply must be written off as such. 2) He was a cruel liar and led generatios to their death and his legacy continues to lead his followers in other countries to death. Christians are still persecuted and killed. 3) He was who he said he was.
You are offering a non argument, since you didn’t make any statements in the first place. You have just assumed that the people on these boards, since the do not believe exactly as you do, are totally ignorant of Jesus. You state “Jesus Christ did exist” as if that is some earth shattering news that no-one on these boards would ever have thought of.

So just for a lark, why don’t you tell us about your Jesus?