Do you all accept biblical inerrancy/infallibility and why?

[bekkilyn]

In one book I read, somebody said that Westerners have minds like machines and this inhibits their religious efforts. I am not certain what was meant, but I wonder if the assumption of cause-and-effect gives us minds like machines. We can't believe an experience unless we can posit a cause. Of course it seems to me that the human brain is hard-wired to look for cause-and-effect, so I don't know that this weakness is restricted to Westerners.

The noun and verb difference you mention is something I need to ponder. In the philosophy of pragmatism there is the maxim "Consider the practical effects of the objects of your conception. Then, your conception of those effects is the whole of your conception of the object." ( Pragmatism - Wikipedia )That is a little bit like turning a tree into a verb maybe. Not exactly I guess.

I'm currently reading a book called Soul Feast by Marjorie J. Thompson in preparation for a class in January and she writes, "from the time of the Enlightenment, Western culture has been steeped in the world-view of rationalism. Rationalism makes reason the highest authority in determining what is true. Its expression in the modern scientific mind has had, until recently, little sympathy for anything that cannot be measured, quantified, or categorized. Invisible realities that do not yield to scientific inquiry have generally been dismissed from the realm of possibility. Consequently, we have suffered a loss of the sense of sacredness in life. God has no place in the assumptions of scientific rationalism. This reduction of life to narrow, mechanistic categories of reality is no longer adequate, however, even for many thoughtful scientists. Indeed, the past few decades have seen the rise of new horizons and questions within the world of science that have opened fascinating dialogues between science and religion -- or perhaps, more specifically, between quantum physics and spirituality."

 

[bekkilyn]

Thomas could either accept the hearsay evidence of Mary and others or he could hope to see the risen Jesus for himself. So Jesus seems to be saying "blessed are those who come to believe based on hearsay evidence". Notice how it is phrased though - "blessed" and "come to believe". The Christian doesn't "CHOOSE to believe" but "COMES to believe" as a result of special blessing bestowed by God.

There is also in the NT the concept of predestination. The belief comes as the Holy Spirit makes the first move. The Holy Spirit then reveals the Bible to be inspired and so forth.

I think it may be that Jesus is suggesting that we "see" him in a more spiritual way, that we have other senses besides our physical sight, enabled by the Spirit as we mature in faith. "Comes to believe" suggests a process that happens over time. God wishes to bless us and extends his blessing to us, and we respond by making the choice to cooperate with him (or not) but it's not necessarily an instantaneous thing. I don't at all believe that God's blessing is only limited to some few, pre-chosen people while all the rest are doomed though.

Had Thomas never known Jesus, had never walked with him or followed in his ways for three plus years before that scripture passage, I wonder that he wouldn't have responded differently and followed through with actually putting his hand in Jesus' side.

 

[dlamberth]

I was thinking it might be interesting to attempt to describe a tree using verbs.
Here are some verbs that come to mind:
- overshadowing
- reverse-breathing
- reaching for both heaven and hell

I first came across the trees as verbs experience while reading "Braiding Sweetgrass" by Robin Kimmerer. I highly recommend this book. Its an easy and enjoyable read with a lot of native wisdom.

Here's a bit about Braiding Sweetgrass I copied and pasted from goodreads. As a botanist, Robin Wall Kimmerer has been trained to ask questions of nature with the tools of science. As a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, she embraces the notion that plants and animals are our oldest teachers. In Braiding Sweetgrass, Kimmerer brings these lenses of knowledge together to show that the awakening of a wider ecological consciousness requires the acknowledgment and celebration of our reciprocal relationship with the rest of the living world. For only when we can hear the languages of other beings are we capable of understanding the generosity of the earth, and learning to give our own gifts in return.

 

[bekkilyn]

I first came across the trees as verbs experience while reading "Braiding Sweetgrass" by Robin Kimmerer. I highly recommend this book. Its an easy and enjoyable read with a lot of native wisdom.

Here's a bit about Braiding Sweetgrass I copied and pasted from goodreads. As a botanist, Robin Wall Kimmerer has been trained to ask questions of nature with the tools of science. As a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation, she embraces the notion that plants and animals are our oldest teachers. In Braiding Sweetgrass, Kimmerer brings these lenses of knowledge together to show that the awakening of a wider ecological consciousness requires the acknowledgment and celebration of our reciprocal relationship with the rest of the living world. For only when we can hear the languages of other beings are we capable of understanding the generosity of the earth, and learning to give our own gifts in return.

When it comes to trees (and all life), I like to think of the word "connecting". Trees are connected to each other through the earth, and communicate with each other and with the plants and other living beings (including humans) who are also connected to every other living being. When we do harm to one, we do harm to all, including ourselves. Too often, humans refuse to listen to the extremely active, vibrant, living world all around.

 

[cloudyday2]

The importance of personal experiences in validating religious beliefs has been coming up, and I found this abstract of a survey of churchgoers:

Little is known about the personality characteristics of liberal and fundamentalist Protestant Christians. To investigate this issue, we asked attendees of a liberal church and of a fundamentalist church to complete the NEO-FFI. Results indicated that the groups scored similarly on the dimensions of neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and extraversion. But fundamentalists scored significantly lower than liberals on the dimension of openness to experience (P < 0.001; effect size: r = 0.68), and did so for each item of this subscale. These data suggest a connection between conservative religious beliefs and a general avoidance of novel ideas and experiences.

Fundamentalists and liberals: personality characteristics of Protestant Christians - ScienceDirect

 

[Starcomet]

I am sure you know my answer to that!

 

[dlamberth]

I was thinking it might be interesting to attempt to describe a tree using verbs.
Here are some verbs that come to mind:
- overshadowing
- reverse-breathing
- reaching for both heaven and hell

The Christian Mystic Teilhard de Chardin has suggested another way of looking at Human Beings as verb with this quote:
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience."

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

The Christian Mystic Teilhard de Chardin has suggested another way of looking at Human Beings as verb with this quote:
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience."

Why was that mystic called a Christian ?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

The importance of personal experiences in validating religious beliefs has been coming up, and I found this abstract of a survey of churchgoers:
Fundamentalists and liberals: personality characteristics of Protestant Christians - ScienceDirect

What is written in God's Word of "novel ideas and experiences" ?

 

[dlamberth]

Why was that mystic called a Christian ?

Check him out and find out for yourself.

 

[dlamberth]

What is written in God's Word of "novel ideas and experiences" ?

God, perhaps?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Check him out and find out for yourself.

No thanks. From what you posted, there doesn't appear to be a connection between them and truth.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

God, perhaps?

Hopefully , sure. But not as presented so far, no.

 

[dlamberth]

Hopefully , sure. But not as presented so far, no.

Back to the O/P, shouldn't God be the standard? We in the West are so boxed in, spiritually speaking, that it just might take a lot of novel ideas in order for us to break through to the inner experience of the Divine. I think the Human Spirit needs those personal revelations for God to become a reality for a person. And sometimes it just might be some hair brain idea that helps that person bring the experience of God into their awareness. As you can tell I'm all for novel ideas and experience.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Yahweh's Word, Torah, Prophets, Psalms, and New Testament,
IS the Standard, as He (the Creator) Says . there is no other.

Do you all accept biblical inerrancy/infallibility and why? Shouldn't God be the standard rather than a book?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Yes, because it is the word of God. He cannot err, nor is he fallible in any way, so it must be that his word is the same.

I'm confused on the dichotomy you are creating between God and what he has said. Taking him as the standard is the same as the Scriptures as the standard. It is from him, he is the true author of it, and reveals himself and his will through it.

The Bible never claims to be directly written by God, unlike the Quran. Quite the contrary, it openly acknowledges its status as an anthology of various texts, many of which bear the names of their (supposed) authors.

 

[Rajni]

Some will cite the verse that all Scripture is God-breathed
and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and
training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16).

But even then, the bible isn't claiming it's the standard. It's
just saying it's useful. Lots of things can be useful for
teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
righteousness.

All things are God-breathed, as well, given that He's the
Creator of all things. So that's really neither here nor
there as far as promoting the bible as the standard, or,
even worse, putting it on the same level as God Himself.
If being God-breathed makes the bible god-like, then
*everything* is God-like (which may or may not be the
case, depending on one's position in the area of
dualism vs. non-dualism).

-

 

[dlamberth]

I was thinking it might be interesting to attempt to describe a tree using verbs.
Here are some verbs that come to mind:
- overshadowing
- reverse-breathing
- reaching for both heaven and hell

From another perspective we are not "on" the Earth, as we tend to say. Rather we are "in" the Earth. There's all sorts of life and stuff stretching up pretty high over our heads. Even miles up. I've found this an interesting thing to contemplate on, and to feel.

 

[timothyu]

From another perspective we are not "on" the Earth, as we tend to say. Rather we are "in" the Earth. There's all sorts of life and stuff stretching up pretty high over our heads. Even miles up. I've found this an interesting thing to contemplate on, and to feel.

The entire universe is earth, so we are in earth as the Lord's Prayer states.

 

[cloudyday2]

The entire universe is earth, so we are in earth as the Lord's Prayer states.

Doesn't it say "on Earth as it is in Heaven" rather than "in Earth as it is in Heaven"? That is how I memorized the prayer, but of course the original prayer was probably in Aramaic.