Dear Roger and @mlkluther,
You just made my point. You do not think that God revealed Himself through Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad or any of His prophets? It takes wisdom and logic to get a glimpse of the eternal God in these words, and to uncover all of the false gods that show up to lead the characters of the OT astray, like Moses for example. These false gods remain active bring discord through rhetoric in religious beliefs.
Best Wishes, Shawn
Hi Shawn,
I donât understand what you mean.
Do you have the wisdom to âget a glimpse of the eternal God in these words?â According to you Moses was led astray and lacked the necessary wisdom?
It is not according to me. Moses was not allowed in the promised land because he was led astray. I look to the father of Logic to help with glimpsing God in all religions. This is why the Greeks had so many gods, because they studied them not to be led astray from them and to uncover the gods attempting to pose as the Father.
I recommend studying the symposium where Socrates brought the three factions of Greek society came together to find common ground. Each person was asked to describe the god Eros (Love) and through their answers we can see which part of society they belonged to - Sparta (materialistic) or Doric (pagan) or Ionic (enlightened). There are two images painted the Love of God, the enlightened (Christian) image and the materialistic image that does not reflect the Love of God.
The duality of the gods is well known throughout history. Satan imitates God to lead people astray and only through logic and wisdom can we expose the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
It is perhaps sad, but true that when you have human bias mixed with human wisdom, you end us with human folly, even if the much of the original seems good. When we start substituting our judgement for Godâs Truth as revealed in Jesus Christ we have big trouble, esp. and including.in the Church.
1 Like
Quite frankly, I donât know what youâre talking about in the previous posts or this one. However, thatâs likely due to my ignorance.
Iâm still not clear if you believe you have some wisdom that Moses and others lack that allows you to âglimpse Godâ while others are led astray?
Dear @mlkluther, The only wisdom that I am claiming is very simple logic and hindsight. If God is clearly defined in the OT as you suggest, then why are there so many religious views of Him? Even Moses, who had a direct contact to God, could not follow His instructions. The OT is the story of God trying to lead His children away worldly desires, starting with the preverbal apple. Adam and Eve could not walk the narrow path that God demanded, Moses could not, Abraham could not. All were led astray by another.
What Socrates adds to the analysis are the tools to ferret out the characteristics of the divine, as I mentioned in the Symposium. Many of the prophets followed the path taken by Socrates, and then of course Jesus. They saw the narrow path and stayed on it. They refused to be distracted by worldly promises of fame or greatness, and they all died rather than betray God.
No, I do not claim to a member of this small group, but I am grateful to be able accept the wisdom they left behind.
And so do you claim that Socrates and Plato succeeded where Abraham, Moses, & company failed?
If so, itâs a wonder Jesus didnât see fit to extol Godâs work through Socrates rather than Abraham and Moses, both of whom get lots of favorable mentions from Jesus lips while the Greek sages were apparently not significant.
Dear Mervin,
No, I never said Plato. I said Jesus and Socrates shared the common life trait that they remained true to God to the end, as did a number of prophets, but not all. I do not deny the good that Moses did, I was just pointing out that God judged him not worthy to enter the promised land, not me. Socrates provided the method to examine the lives of Moses and Abraham to see where they went wrong and to learn from them. Plato recorded the words of Socrates for us. Plato is to Socrates as John is to Jesus.
Best Wishes, Shawn
Greetings Shawn,
I think this is why I find it difficult to follow what you post. It seems to me, and please correct me if I am mistaken, you write as if what you are saying is somehow to be considered a natural reading of the text that falls within the realms of orthodoxy. However, it is manifestly not so, and is not even close to being in the realm of orthodox Christianity. So, I think that is why I have such difficulty understanding what you are sayingâŚand on top of thatâŚmy dullness does not help.
In saying that you are not a part of the group but accept what they have left behind - is essentially saying you have the wisdom to accept the wisdom they have left behind while others, evidently, do not.
And since you are aware of ancient groups and teachingsâŚyou must be aware of how close this is to Gnosticism. That a certain group has a special âgnosisâ that others do not that allows them the wisdom to see what other cannot about the various emanations of god, etc., etc., etc.
Dear @mlkluther,
If you read through this thread, there is not agreement among orthodox contributors about God, other than I am who I am. This is why I have added my cautions when speculating about topics like âGod of the gapsâ. I point to rules of logic to help with issues beyond orthodoxy.
I hope that you do not think that The God of the Gaps is an orthodox view. It is not. We do not have to speculate about issues beyond orthodoxy. Theology is not speculation. Theology is applying logic to the theological facts. If there are no facts to back up theology, then we cannot solve the problem theologically.
There is no God of the Gaps. There is only God of the Facts.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.