Identifying the word of god

[robvalue]

Thank you Michael, I didn't think anyone was going to step up to the plate

Any more takers for this?

[Esquilax]

ShaMan. For me, as with the faith I have, I would always take small steps and check things against reality and against conscience. So I would allow the book to challenge me, but then I would check the results of such challenge against my conscience and against the real experience of my life. Questions I might reflect on are....

Does the book speak to my life and the life I see around me? Is its guidence in line with my conscience? Has it helped me to dig deeper into my conscence? Where have others found inspiration in its pages? Where am I most unsure of its guidence and what is it that makes me wary of it? Where might have it led others astray, and do I need to be careful of interpretatation or do I need to reject it outright? Could I be reading a mixture of 'good' and 'bad', and if so can I learn from the good and set aside the bad? How does the text compare to wisdom found elsewhere - does it point to, or contradict, widely held truths? And finally, and perhaps most importantly, what small step can I take to then reflect on?

Bolding mine.

Don't get me wrong when I ask this, as I do find your discernment on these issues to be positive, but it does lead me to a question: doesn't there come a point, when you're fact checking the tenets of a religion and holding them up to your own morality first to see if they fit, where you've stopped following "god's word" in the spirit it was intended and have just started following your own convictions, while phrasing them in divine language? I mean, one would think that a divinely authored, inerrant book wouldn't require that sort of thinking, that it'd be an all-or-nothing sort of deal, right?

If you're taking the good and rejecting the bad, aren't you really just assigning your own morality to things, and then shopping out the credit for the good you do to someone else?

[Michael]

Equilax, As ever, I can only speak personally.

In essence, yes, I am ultimately putting my own convictions of morality before even the bible, though I let the bible help inform those convictions. Many Christians might be uncomfortable with me saying that but I think ultimately it is always us that will be the final arbiter of any moral decisions (and that includes submitting ourselves totally to the bible). I see no way to escape subjectivity, and so I embrace it and work with it.

Something I find relevant here is the word obedience (that is a key word in monastic spirituality). The word comes from the Latin oboedire which, in turn, comes from ob-audire, or listen to. The Rule of St. Benedict, a key text in monastic Christianity, starts with a quote from the book of Proverbs, saying "My son, be attentive to my words; incline your ear to my sayings". For me that sums up what obedience to the bible or to the Church means; it means I am truly willing to listen. So it can challenge me; and I think that is of great value. But at the end of the day I must then follow my conscience. As Martin Luther famously is said to have said, when opposing the Church of his day, "Here I stand, I can do no other". Or, as the more subtle thinker and diplomat, John Henry Newman, said "I toast the Pope, but to conscience first".

People may see that either as a low view of the bible and of the Church, or a high view of a developed conscience. I'll leave others to make that judgement.

[robvalue]

I think that's the very first time I've heard a religious person say that, and I respect that a lot. Your view of religion and holy books certainly seems very different to the norm, and it seems far better to me.

[DramaQueen]

I'm hungry, like really really hungry.

[Elskidor]

The entire concept of religion and invisible gods is so absurd I simply fail to understand how we can have so many morons still buying into this crap. I have an unhealthy anger that I can't seem to control when it comes to these weak minded sorts. My Grandfather died last week and his funeral was on Friday. He was a man of scientific mind that questioned all things, including religion, but some dipshit preacher came to turn my grandfather's burial into his own preaching ground. I was so disgusted I refused to shake his hand afterwards and told him to get the hell away from me. These morons are cursed with utter stupidity, and I felt robbed by a Jesus freak. It should have been a time for his family and friends to remember the man and recollect on his life and why we all loved him, and not a phony that died over 2000 years ago, if he ever existed at all.

Coffee rant over.

[ShaMan]

Coffee rant over.

I feel your angst.

[DramaQueen]

Coffee rant over.

I feel your angst.

Do you want to feel mine?

[Michael]

My Grandfather died last week and his funeral was on Friday. He was a man of scientific mind that questioned all things, including religion.

I'm sorry for your loss Elskidor. I think, in your post, your love and respect for you grandfather came through more than your anger. We don't get angry about things or people we don't care about.

---

Robvalue. Thank you for your kind words.

[Tonus]

Then you are presented with two books. The names aren't important, let's just call them A and B. It has been guaranteed to you somehow that one of these really is the dictated word of god. The other is an elaborate fake, a book written by men to mimic the style of the true book.

In the scenario you present there is a god and he has provided humanity with a book, and it is within reach (or even in your possession). That's a lot to presuppose. In such a scenario, I would expect the author of each book to step forward and identify himself. It simply doesn't make sense to me that a deity would write a guidebook so unimpressive that any yahoo can write a convincing fake, or that he'd give us such a guide and then disappear so completely that we're not even sure that the book wasn't human in origin.