(Plato's Forms vs. God's Truth) / Authenticity

This may come out sort of mumbled.

This morning the sermon focused on authenticity. I had no pen and no paper, which is unusual, so I’m having to write this from sleepy memory, and quickly.

But, basically the idea is that thinking of God’s truth as only for the seminary graduates and pastors, and only relevant on Sundays in church, is making the same mistake Plato makes about a higher world of Forms.

God’s truth is applicable in the everyday, and accessible to every person.

We can question it and test it, because it will stand up to the test, and we are commanded to test all things, and hold on to what is good. And we should live and proclaim God’s excellent, authentic truths everyday and to everyone, if we are to be authentic.

The message was backed up with verses out of 1 Peter 2, Acts 2, and somewhere else I forget. The ONE time I forget pen and paper…!!!

What is Truth? What is God? :wink:

Icthus- Yes, I think you’re correct in what you say here, but it certainly has it’s problems. If God’s truth was simply for the academics, then we could leave it to them, and the majority being ignorant would be acceptable. But since we expect people to have religious beliefs, and indeed Christ calls us to bring His word to everbody, that implies accessibility.
On the other hand, though, “we can test it and question it” is a tricky statement. It implies something about the nature of the Word- that it will pas s such tests, but it also implies something about us- that we can fairly administer such tests and correctly interpret the results. That’s far from given, and I don’t think we can rightly say that capability is accessible to all.

Well the Christian belief in man being created in the ‘form of God’ is solely derived from Plato’s belief that there was a ‘form of man’, as well as perfect forms for all such concepts one may associate with the teachings of Christianity such as ‘love’ and ‘beauty’. Many of Christianity’s most fundamental beliefs are influenced by what Plato said, and the Christian version of the intellectual journey of self-revelation that takes place in Plato’s ‘analogy of the cave’ has always been the backbone of that religion. Whether Plato would have recognised the communal way in which Christianity undertakes this journey as opposed to the personal one he appears to encourage is another matter.

Bane – does that wink signify those are rhetorical questions?

– Uccisore

It might help if you mention specifically what kinds of quesitons are generated when it comes to the Word. Be specific, and you’ll see that all are qualified. God is the giver of interpretation, and He gives to all who ask, seek and knock.

– James

The correct word is not “form” but “image” and predates Plato. The rest of what you said is news to me… I don’t think you understand Christianity, or have some cult in mind. Christianity is all about a personal relationship with our Savior… and, because the point is love, community is important. God’s truths are subject to (and stand up to) peer review in such a community… one way to look at it.

Icthus

Obedience is a virtue, too. We’re full of sin. We ask the wrong questions, and we ignore answers we don’t like. We error, and misinterpret information. All the denominations we have are an expression of that. Take the question “Why are these books considered the Word of God, and not those ones?” That’s not a question that can be answered from reading Scripture, and if you’re saying that God reveals the truth of the matter to anybody who really wants to know, then it seems that a lot of people who claim to be honest seekers really aren’t, which is kind of my point.

huh?

If they did not agree where it matters, they would be cults instead of denominations. Their disagreement can not necessarily be owed to asking the wrong questions, ignoring answers they don’t like, erroring, or misinterpreting information. It’s okay to disagree on certain things. We are still all one body.

But, you raise an interesting point that explains misinterpretations. It does not however rule out correct ones. Sometimes we ask the right questions, we don’t ignore answers we don’t like, we don’t error by way of misinterpretation…

I didn’t say that studying Scripture is the only way to learn about God – and Scripture itself does help answer that question. A question does not grow inside a person incapable of acquiring the tools to find the answer. And the tools are definitely available to answer that question.

If that’s all you had said, I’d have said “good point” with one tiny qualification – those same people can turn into honest seekers, and so – all are capable.

This is sort of getting off-topic.

The “we’re full of sin” factor reminds me of Kierkegaard. But he was just arguing that the human mind is incapable of discovering divine truth because of our fallen state. He had other reasons besides that as well. This book I’m reading has a whole chapter dedicated to the relationship between faith and reason – the question of reason or revelation. If you’re interested I could go into it… a little more on-topic.

I don’t know. I think I was joking about what huge open-ended questions they are: What is Truth? What is God?

Your post was talking about “God’s Truth”. I question both concepts and would debate from a very different perspective regarding “God” or “Truth”, let alone a concept that is a combination of both of them. :sunglasses:

Well, fortunately Pastor had another go at the sermon, and fleshed it out a bit – and this time I had pen and paper.

The relevant verses were Acts 2:42-47; Matt 5:13-16 and 9:9-13.

Notes I took (not all of the words came out of the Pastor’s mouth… I reword things to fit with what I already know… I memorize it better that way):

Two sermons in the series that I missed:
Authentic truth – Jesus’ life interprets; bounce it off others, don’t be afraid to question
Authentic people – who we are in Christ

Where we are at in the series:
Authentic mission – proclaim excellencies (authentic truth) to God in worship, to believers in discipleship, and to unbelievers in evangelism

Plains of Plato (not good) – don’t leave authentic truth to “professionals”
Steeple mentality – “come to us” is wrong – GO… impact the culture… to whom did Jesus go?

Matthew 9:9-13 –

  1. Matthew (dreaded tax collector, went on to write gospel of Matthew) at the top of “most unlikely to succeed” list (see “Lord calls the lowly” thread – this is how God works… a form of miracle)
  2. Jesus kicked back with him on his own turf
  3. Jesus took the disciples with Him
  4. Jesus didn’t worry about what the churchy people thought
  5. Matthew 9:13 go and learn what this means
  6. religiosity misses the point, I desire your heart (love people)

Show mercy: take initiative to go to them and help… think of the baggage associated with Matthew. Look at the results of what happened in his life. Redemption.

Great Commission is faith building and we are commanded to do it.

Christianity is all about a personal relationship with our Savior… and, because the point is love, community is important. God’s truths are subject to (and stand up to) peer review in an authentic community…

“Authentic Community” notes

Luke 6:12-37; Acts 2:42-47

Problems with living missionally, without at the same time living in authentic community: corruption, not knowing all the answers yourself, persecution

Problems if you don’t live missionally in authentic community: become bored believer, in danger of drifting away

Living in authentic community: getting together around a common theme: Christ… transcends location. Only takes 2.

Jesus’ authentic community went from the 70 to the 12 disciples, to the closer disciples like John and Peter. After choosing the 12, he lays out the values of the community, which have a “one shoulder in/one shoulder out” mentality… an inward and an outward focus.

Without the outward focus, the community can become sectarian, a cult, and encounter all the problems of not living missionally (see above). Without the inward focus you have all the problems of living missionally without authentic community (see above).

One shoulder in: In the beatitudes it says blessed are you who acknowledge that you are weak, and woe to you who consider yourselves strong (see my “Lord calls the lowly” thread). Those who acknowledge their weakness open themselves to something greater – God and authentic community. Those who think they are strong, settle for less, rob themselves of God and authentic community. [ An aside to Satyr – in the ‘evil’ thread, you mention innocent/guilty are concepts invented by the weak. I’ve heard others say they are concepts invented by the strong to control the weak. What do you say about that? This sermon points out that an elite community is still community… still a type of herd. It seems like calling a larger herd a herd, while belonging to a smaller herd, is like calling a larger restaurant full of many people a restaurant, while eating in a smaller restaurant with less people in it. Make it sound like an insult, and people, if they don’t stop and think about it, will get all defensive over nothing. Saying, “Yeah, that’s just it, though…. They don’t stop and think,” misses the fact that you are the one pointing out a speck in their eye that is not a speck but a pupil, when you have in your own eye a log that is not a log. That is utterly pointless – more pointless than failing to stop and think. It is an abuse of thought. ]

One shoulder out: Also in the beatitudes it points out that even sinners lend/love to those who repay/love them back…. And Jesus says to go beyond that and lend/love expecting nothing in return – lend/love in a way that transcends this world. From where I sit, Nietzsche was saying “go back” not “go beyond”. If you disagree, say why.

In vv. 17-19 before beatitudes, you see Jesus living missionally and in authentic community at the same time.

Bane – I acccept that you “question both concepts and would debate from a very different perspective regarding ‘God’ or ‘Truth’, let alone a concept that is a combination of both of them.” I also accept that you must have some sort of idea of what my concepts are, in order to position yourself ‘from a very different perspective’. Otherwise, you’re just being disagreeable, no? However – perhaps your idea of my concepts is incorrect?

Want to find out?

Dude you speak such profound, deep thoughts that I am stricken speechless by the power of God’s word.

Please keep us up to date on what your pastor tells you the truth is.
We need to know.
:astonished:
Huh?..What?..
Did anyone hear cowbells?

I don’t hear cowbells, no. But… methinks you said that 'cause if you said something like “baaaa” it would just resemble your moniker, seeing as sheep and goats don’t sound a whole lot different unless you’re around them alot. Disclaimer: I don’t claim to be speaking God’s words.

As you might be able to figure out, I need to hear these words myself, and apply them. I ain’t preachin’. If you have actual feedback, let’s hear it.

The beautitudes are really just an enumerated version of the golden commandment, love thyself as thy neighbor. Christ, of course, had to work through deduction rather than induction, since man had forgotten this golden rule since the slaughter of Abel by Cain.
When studying scripture chronologically, we are given all the tools of wisdom before learning the teachings of Christ. The truth that we have to accept today is that we all can know God’s Truth can be fully understood since Christ has already conquered death and the world. Those who can come to find this Truth will be deemed worthy of living in the kingdom upon earth, which is soon to be established.

The golden commandment you write is no where found in Scripture.

God’s truth and Christ’s truth are one and the same. Your focus is on truth, your focus should be on love (the truth without love is not the whole truth). For example, those who were sensitive about eating food sacrificed to idols… their feelings were to be respected by those who “knew better” (that the idols were nothing)…

Your signature is a whole 'nother can of worms.

What do you think about what has been said on the central topic of this thread?