Hello Litenbolt:
— Human interaction is necessary. Would one rather read the writings of Plato, Socrates or one of the Apostles, or sit and talk with them. Books have their place, but they can’t replace social intervention. Morality can be described in writings, but is best understood through discussion with others.
O- So we agree. It is an intersting point, wouldn’t you say, in that the great moral teachers, Buddha, Socrates, Jesus have no surviving writings authored by their hand? I believe it was probably a choice. Plato tells us the story of a king who feared the negative effects of writing and why not. The book is an attempt at representation. No sooner than all statutes are destroyed and denounced as made by man with rocks and wood that God is made an object once again, not of our sight, not for us to see as a form but to read.
— God did find it necessary to have a visual record. Some of those records are esoterically metaphorical to some readers. Some interpret God in the Bible as a tyrannical murderer through a selective eye because they don’t understand the precepts of His intent and reasoning. No one can know God’s mind.
O- A very old defense, but it fails and here is why: We call God by names. We give God predicates. God is loving, God is just etc, etc. But then, if we know nothing about His mind, how can we assign words like just and loving which require an intimate knowledge of the mind? The POE, it is true, disappears as we let go of our need for reason and knowledge, but we are inconsistent if we admit our impotence in knowing the mind of God and then boasting about His revelation.
The view that He is a tyrannical murderer comes not from the presumption that one “knows” the mind of God but because one believes in the recorded history of God’s interaction with man. The OT has a claim as being a book of sacred history.
— Sometimes when man gets involved in the Works of God that religion suffers.
O- Yet God acts in the world through men and women, and even when the Bible tells the story as man doing God’s will, religion suffers. Christianity still has to explain the barbarity of Yahweh.
— God is the ‘butcher’ of this world. He did not even save His son on the cross.
A common misconception who views God on the surface. I’m surprised that someone who made some good observations misses the point Jesus’ Sacrifice. He’s missing the Spiritual aspect behind the act. It appears his observation can not look beyond the confines of this existence…even for one who says God speaks to our hearts. I believe God is trying to get people above the things of this earth into a higher spiritual existence.
O- He means that the Christian version of God, a myth perhaps in his own eyes, but if He existed as the Christians describe Him, would have to give an account for the barbarity of His Creation. Remember, God is omnipotent and not subject to any rules. Miracles are in fact the break of otherwise “immutable” rules. As Creator, He is responsible for everything including the system of retribution. Let me explain:
Religion is a system of representation. You do X as a symbol of Y. But why do you need a symbol? That is the question to God. God asks Abraham his precious son as a sacrifice, as a symbol. Why? What could possibly be worth the life of an innocent child? Why tolerate a universe where children are murdered as a means to an end? Why are children treated even as “means”? God settles for the blood of an animal…this time. Now comes Jesus…another innocent who must suffer. Jesus ask that this cup be taken from his hands, because in the end all things are possible to God so why tolerate in His creation the need for the sheeding of innocent blood? God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son to be butchered in our name. His son asked to be spared but was still made to suffer by His holy Father. Why, Jesus asks, hast Thou forsaken me?"… I cannot help but to feel sad for our “saviour”. People used to blame the death of Jesus on the Jews, others on Judas…but the truth is that it was God who wanted it to be as it was, God who could have sent a Legion of angels to wipe out all the Romans and God who remained stern in the face of Jesus last plead.
…I could immagine Olmi making this case…
— It’s true the White Throne Judgement will take place. Man’s sins will seperate them from God’s Presence…not God. The reason there will be an account is to show how some men failed to heed God’s Word. Those saved through Christ will have their sins negated, even though their works will insufficient to note…but they will accepted in Heaven.
O- You bring me back to the problem of freewill. Why do some fail, as you say, to heed God’s word while others do? And does it mean to heed His words? I say this becauise Jesus wanted more than just praise and acclamation. He wanted deeds. The first three Gospels show a jewish prophet for a Jesus, who exhorts men into action, into repentance, to live the life God intended in this life and earn the next. That is why he preaches and teaches those who follow him and chastise them when they fail to put in practice what he has taught them. This is the theology of James. It was rejected because it failed to explained the death of Jesus as necessary.
Now, you also have John and this Gospel shows Jesus as totally in control so that even those that are saved are those that Jesus has chosen. Paul echoes this sentiment in his Romans. If this is the case, even to heed His word then is not our responsibility and Ermano Olmi’s accusation must be heard.