Critique Time!

[Drich]

For what it's worth, I seem to recall hearing that a wise man advised Christians, or at least Christian missionaries, to be as harmless as doves and wise as serpents. Or as shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves. Something like that. The (figurative) wisdom of the serpent referst to being knowledgeable, picking your battles, understanding the position of those to whom you are talking, that kind of thing, I think. The innocence or harmlessness would seem to be meekness, gentleness, humility, and empathy.

I know that's a hard standard and I don't expect perfection, but you would be more effective if you attempt to follow that advice, IMHO.

Picking battles is why i let certain topics go. Once people start talking past each other the conversation becomes moot.

I am working on 'meekness' that was the point of this thread.

Gentleness may work well in person, as it can be demonstrated. I find it difficult to balance what the current perception of what gentleness should be, against how Christ Himself was 'gentle' to the pharisees in a place like this.

The current soceitial understanding of Humility is a quality I also find hard to demonstrate. To be Humble in the site of God is to not speak boastfully about one's self or act that way. In our soceity to be humble is to never gain the upper hand to always yield to the proud. Gaining the upper hand is a non issue scripturally if one gives God his due. One can even boast of what God has done for or through Him. Paul did this many times. As he was proud of what God did for and with Him. I too am very proud of what God has done for and with me.

Empathy is very difficult for me personally because I was raise a different way. in that life is not about the indivisual it is about the family or the soceity as a whole. "The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few."

I do and have always done what is best for the group in given situation, despite what I personally feel. If I ignore my own personal feelings for the greater good, then how is it I am supposed to acknoweledge another person's 'feelings' if it is not also for the greater good?

I am not ready for that one yet. If I can suck it up and put my 'feelings' aside and deal with the given facts of the matter then i expect anyone wanting to be apart of a given discussion to do the same.

---

My only request for you, Drich, is to make sense of the Protestant contradiction that underlies every other notion in your "philosophy": simultaneously embracing sola scriptura while rejecting the Catholic tradition of prima ecclesia.

what is my philosphy opposes the protestant notion, and how does it simultaneously embrace sola scriptura?

I can easily tell you why prima ecclesia is not valid. Because we do not have any command outside of the orginal church doctrine created hundreds of years after the NT was written that supports this notion. Meaning the church leadership want authority over what God allowed for in the bible.