[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

You should worry about this because beginning with our Saviour and on through the centuries christians and specifically the gospel has been recieved by a few and despised by many.

The church has thrived on persecution so much so that it has become an especially effective propaganda tool for any group that might hope to distinguish their version of "the Gospel" as the distinctly correct one. Evangelicals have been playing this game for 200 years now, although it is more difficult to play the martyr in the face of intellectual opposition than it was for the early Christians, or the Protestant martyrs, or many of the current underground Christian churches in the Islamic world.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Are these verses not in your bible?:

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Of course the light the apostle John is talking about is Jesus the Christ. And it is that light we are to bare:

Joh 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.


You can't argue the atheists on here and many other non-believers hate the notion of sin or accountability towards God. I can generate three pages of venom by just identifying something as a sin.

I think that depends entirely upon what you choose to identify as sin and why you do so. Jesus's own concept of "sin" was understandably informed and conformed to the ancient Jewish law that he inherited, but I expect that you are probably more often than not missing the point when studying his ethic: which I believe would tend to be much more accommodative and adaptive in accordance with his higher ideals of justice and community. I think the real issue here is actually not what constitutes "sin", but how you and I likely differ in how we would define the Gospel.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

You on the other hand offend no one with your faith. That is because your dogma conforms to the world whenever there is a possibility of offence.

I certainly hope that I do not subscribe to any "dogma"! I would prefer to think that my own faith and ethic are products of how the "weightier matters of the law" in Jesus's perception might practically be applied in the modern world. I'm a big fan of evidence, and what evidence teaches us about our selves and how we ought get along in this world.

I understand that given your own Evangelically fuelled need to project a persecution complex, you are also driven by your own capacity to offend. After all, in a world in which you believe the Spirit of God manifests in the face of "persecution", offence must be something of a virtue. Well, in this day and age, it has become abundantly clear to me that this is no longer an effective means by which to expand God's Kingdom.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Your bible must be pretty small with all the pages you've ripped out. You should worry that a gospel and set of books that so many have died for rather than compromise you won't risk living by. Is that light John talked about even in you?

I really do get irritated by the false dichotomy drawn from within Christian circles between those believers who "take the Bible seriously" and those who do not. Typically, the "real Christians" are those who subscribe to an unsophisticated notion of "divine inspiration" that champions a "plain reading" of the biblical text as a badge of honour, in the face of all things reasonable and clear that they are on the side of all things true and holy. The rest of us who might dare to question the historical, cultural, political or social effects on the texts, and who would grapple and struggle with their meaning and application as the world continues to change before our very eyes are somehow less "serious" about the Bible.

Give me a freaking break. I have dedicated the better part of the last twenty years to robust biblical study, and you believe my Bible to be "small"?

On the contrary, I am not the one ripping out ANY pages. My Bible still contains the stories of genocide, rape, slavery and misogyny, but unlike you and your ilk, I do not need to apologetically rewrite them into something more palatable and defensible for fear that they might jeopardize the philosophical and theological house of cards that you have erected. Unlike you, the "authority of Scripture" for me actually frees me to be a thoughtful and effective INTERPRETOR of Scripture—not to ignore my own intellect and to passively conform to my own human understanding of the text, but to intentionally pursue meaning and truth, even in those places in which such things are not obvious, and are difficult to see.

I see that you have written a lot here, and I will read through carefully and respond to everything as I get around to it. Amid preparing for an international move that takes place in two weeks, my free time is at a premium these days.

...but there should be enough there for you to chew on in the meantime.