Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Didn't Jesus refer to this psalm?  Didn't his doing so meet with
    resistance?
    
    Richard
    

    Actually I believe his recitation of this Psalm actually kept Him out
    of harms way.  They were about to stone him for claiming to be God.  He
    asked, isn't it written, ye are gods?
    
    I always saw him as using scripture out of context here and never
    understood why he did it!
    
    -Jack

>    I always saw him as using scripture out of context here and never
>    understood why he did it!

<gasp!>

Jesus using Scripture out of context?!

    No doubt this isn't the case...merely my lack of wisdom on the matter!
    :-)

    how about one line at a time?
    
    God has taken his place in the divine council: in the midst of the gods
    he holds judgment.
    
    
    This poem seems to have been written in the pre monotheistic period of
    Israelite theological development.  It potrays Yahweh taking his place
    amidst the council of other gods, perhaps even as the head of the
    council.

The Revised English Bible has translated Psalm 82 a bit differently.
I'ved typed it in below. The paragraph breaks are my own.

	God takes his place in the court of heaven to pronounce
	judgement among the gods: "How much longer will you judge 
        unjustly and favor the wicked? Uphold the cause of the weak 
        and the fatherless, and see right done to the afflicted and 
        destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy, and save them from 
        the clutches of the wicked."

	But these gods know nothing and understand nothing, they walk 
	about in darkness; meanwhile earth's foundations are all giving
	way.

        "This is my sentence: "Though you are gods, all sons of the Most
        High, yet you shall die as mortals die, and fall as any prince does.'

        God, arise and judge the earth, for all the nations are yours.

I don't have my interlinear and Hebrew lexicon here so I can't attempt to 
delve into a couple of the key questions. That is, what is the Hebrew for
God versus gods in this Psalm, and to whom do those words refer? My guess 
is that "God" is probably the unpronouncable name, made up of the Hebrew 
letters yad, hey, vav, hey which refers specifically to the One, unique God 
Almighty. I also think "gods" is some other word that could possibly be 
interpreted to be the fallen angelic host, man-made gods and graven images 
(doubtful from the way the rest of the Psalm reads), or those who are in 
position of rulership on earth. I don't think it means deities equal to the 
One true God or even near equal. I think these gods are created beings of 
some sort. I'll see what I can find out at home where all my resource 
materials are.

Whatever the case about God versus gods, several things are clear:

    1) The narrator shows us by the statement about God sitting in judgement
       in the heavenly courts that God has the authority and ability to judge 
       these "gods", pronounce their sentence, and carry it out. They are 
       subject to God.

    2) First God brings forth the charges - they favor the wicked and when
       they judge, the side with the one who has done wrong rather than with
       the righteous.

    3) God tells them what they ought to be doing that they are not doing
       which is to uphold the cause of the vulnerable and weak, the needy,
       and to protect them against those who would use them for their own
       evil purposes.
       
    4) The narrator makes it clear that these "gods" haven't got a clue as 
       to what is really going on, that while they think they are furthering
       their own cause, the world they depend on is perishing by the very
       things they do.

    5) God pronounces his sentence. These "gods" will fail, perish, and 
       disappear as surely as any mortal. They have no real power.

    6) The narrator states his conviction that God will judge justly and
       right the current wrongs, and also declares that God has the authority
       to do this as all the nations belong to God.

I'll have to look up Yeshua's reference to this Psalm before I comment on it.

Leslie

Note 1186.4

>    No doubt this isn't the case...merely my lack of wisdom on the matter!
>    :-)

An interesting possibility.

    And probably a high one too! :-)

    There's a possibility that you might be right, too.
    
    I like Jim Kirk's proposal to such a question.  I'll see if I can find
    it.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

================================================================================
Note 400.2       Did Jesus Ever Quote Scripture Out of Context?           2 of 8
TFH::KIRK "a simple song"                            11 lines   5-FEB-1992 15:18
                                   -< my 2� >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Richard,

My quick answer is that Jesus did not quote Scripture out of context.
He gave new context to Scripture, transcended context, that sort of thing. 

He brought a human intimacy to Scripture that may have been shocking to some 
20 centuries ago.  It may still be shocking to some.  

Peace,

Jim

.6 Johnson

    3) God tells them what they ought to be doing that they are not doing
       which is to uphold the cause of the vulnerable and weak, the needy,
       and to protect them against those who would use them for their own
       evil purposes.

Who then will judge God against these standards? I believe he would be found 
lacking...

    6) The narrator states his conviction that God will judge justly and
       right the current wrongs, and also declares that God has the authority
       to do this as all the nations belong to God.

When? The wrongs have continued unabated through all of human history, and 
shows no sign of changing. What is he waiting for? 

I listened on NPR last night while some slimebag tried his best to bilk a 
vulnerable, weak, needy old lady out of more of her life savings. When he 
didn't succeed (this time, he already had most of her money) he proceeded to 
berate her in a way I wouldn't use on a dog.

I can understand your questions & your comments along similar veins in 
another note.  I have my own answer, but I do not think you will see it
as valid - I think this came up before. 

It has to be do with our finate, limited view of history, and of all that
God is doing and has planned.  In the Bible the injustice of the world as
we see it is talked about, and also the need to trust God and be patient
as history and time unfold.  Our picture is incomplete.  In my own life,
I have seen answered prayer and the providential love of God, while also 
experiencing great loss and heartache. I have seen the same sorts of things 
in the lives of others whom I know, and in the news. Most of the time I can
understand better in retrospect rather than while something is happening.
Some things I never understand, but I have seen answered prayer and have
trust in God. 

Trusting God and being patient in Him does not mean sitting back and doing
nothing. I think that when we are in a position to help or to speak up or
to take action against injustice, or when we see someone in need that we are
called to do what we can. I think we are in partnership with God and have 
responsibilities of our own to work at righting wrong.

Leslie

    Steve.
    
    I believe that the psalmist is asking the same questions that you ask?
    
    Why is there injustice?
    
                                        Patricia

.13 Flanagan

Almost. (I believe I know why there is injustice). My question is more 
specifically why would an omnipotent all-loving being *CREATE* injustice?

.12 Johnson

Leslie,

How do you then explain non-believers that also get their prayers answered, 
although they haven't actually made any? I would expect to see some sort of 
difference in the trials, tribulations and solutions of believers and 
non-believers, but I see none whatsoever. Why doesn't God help his followers 
more than those that don't believe?

Steve

>How do you then explain non-believers that also get their prayers answered, 
    >although they haven't actually made any? 
    
    Hi Steve,
    
    You don't really expect an answer from your contradictory question, do
    you? ;)  If the unbelievers have not made a prayer, then there is no
    prayer to answer.
    
    >I would expect to see some sort of difference in the trials, tribulations 
    >and solutions of believers and non-believers, but I see none whatsoever. 
    
    Very strange statement, Steve!  How does one view another's trials,
    tribulations and solutions?
    
    >Why doesn't God help his followers more than those that don't believe?
    
    He does!!!!!!  Take death, for example.  The nonbeliever can only
    expect judgement and fear.  The believer expects eternal life in the
    very presence of God!!!  One has the nagging fear and expectation
    of judgement while another lives life with confidence and hope in God's 
    power to raise Christ from the dead.
    
    The reality of death is even more poignant.  The believer spends
    eternity in God's presence.  The nonbeliever spends eternity separated
    from God, tormented day and night, probably by his/her own regret and
    sorrow.
    
    Death is the greatest way God helps the believer more than the
    unbeliever.  There are endless ways in which God treats believers and
    nonbelievers differently, to the believers great advantage.  There are
    millions of people who can testify to this today.
    
    jeff

Steve

.15 Benson

Jeff,

    Very strange statement, Steve!  How does one view another's trials,
    tribulations and solutions?

I have a lot of friends, both Christians and non-Christians. I have watched as 
life unfolds for them, and me, and seen no discernable difference in how they 
are treated by fate. I have seen the faithfuls prayer go unanswered, I have 
seen the hopes of the faithless 'granted' (and I have seen the reverse). 

    He does!!!!!!  Take death, for example.  The nonbeliever can only
    expect judgement and fear.  The believer expects eternal life in the
    very presence of God!!!  

But this is something that you were promised, you have no way of truly telling 
(besides faith) that this is true. I, however, can look at what is happening 
here and now, and make judgements based upon that. 

    One has the nagging fear and expectation
    of judgement while another lives life with confidence and hope in God's 
    power to raise Christ from the dead.

All I can say to this is that I honestly have no nagging fear of 
death or judgement, nor any particular expectations. I find your use of the 
word 'hope', however, to be enlightening.

    The reality of death is even more poignant.  The believer spends
    eternity in God's presence.  The nonbeliever spends eternity separated
    from God, tormented day and night, probably by his/her own regret and
    sorrow.

Another blow to the theory of an all-loving compassionate God!

    Death is the greatest way God helps the believer more than the
    unbeliever.  There are endless ways in which God treats believers and
    nonbelievers differently, to the believers great advantage.  There are
    millions of people who can testify to this today.

Again, this is only an unknown and unknowable promise for the future. I would 
be interested in why you believe that Christians are treated differently. I 
don't find millions of people testifying to God's power particularly 
convincing, though, as their are millions of people that can also testify 
otherwise. Your belief structure will color events to the way you expect to 
see them.

Steve

    Steve,
    
    Why is there injustice?
    
                                         Patricia

    And what happens to all the children who die before they are congiscent
    of the concept of either a god or sin?
    
    

Note 1186.15

>    He does!!!!!!  Take death, for example.  The nonbeliever can only
>    expect judgement and fear.  The believer expects eternal life in the
>    very presence of God!!!  One has the nagging fear and expectation
>    of judgement while another lives life with confidence and hope in God's 
>    power to raise Christ from the dead.

I don't think this is true.  I can't imagine non-believers expecting judgment
and fear.  It doesn't seem like they would be classified as non-believers if
they had such expectations.

Richard

    In the interest of dispensationalism...
    
    Considering the rich man who died and his eyes opened and he was in
    flame, it would make sense that one who has died in sin such as this
    man is awaiting the judgement day...which is a future event.  For the
    sake of argument, contemplate the possibility of hell for a moment. 
    The act of being condemned to Gehenna is a future event according to
    scripture.  It takes place at the Great White Throne Judgement where
    sin is destroyed and only holiness abounds.
    
    -Jack

re Note 1186.16 by TINCUP::inwo.cxo.dec.com::Bittrolff:

> All I can say to this is that I honestly have no nagging fear of 
> death or judgement, nor any particular expectations. I find your use of the 
> word 'hope', however, to be enlightening.

        Well then, Steve, we'll preach the good news of hope and joy
        until you have fear of death and judgment, because we love
        you.

        Bob

There is some Scripture I would like to look up and quote here for you.
I will try to fit it in ... I wish I was one of those people with the
terrific memories who can remember book, chapter, & verse for tons of 
quotes. I always have to look things up except for a very few special to
me quotes. I will try not to forget to do this - remind me if haven't
put in anything by Thursday morning.

Also, if you are truely interested in these questions, and what people
of faith in God have to say about them, I recommend two books. One is 
by Edith Schaeffer. It's titled "Affliction". The other is called "Doubt",
and is written by Os Guinness.

Leslie

.17 Flanagan

Patricia,

    Why is there injustice?

If you view the world as having evolved as opposed to being created, or even 
as created but then unattended, it all fits together quite nicely without 
having to stretch for explanations. The only reason the question is hard is 
that you are trying to reconcile a contradiction, that of an all-loving 
all-powerful God and the obvious evil and injustice you see around you. 

To answer, there is injustice because people are people, there are good people 
and obviously there are bad people. There are the laws of nature, and these 
just happen, if there are people in the way they get hurt. There are birth 
defects because the machinery of our bodies is not perfect. In other words, 
shit happens! :^)

BTW, why did God create hate? How much better would the world be, while still 
allowing for tribulations to make us strong, if he had just left that emotion 
out of the equation?
----------------------------
.21 Fleischer

Bob,

Knock yourself out! :^) I'll take all the positive thoughts I can get!

Steve

    .20
    
    So, the rich man (mentioned only in Luke) was a non-believer?  I don't
    think so.
    
    Or were you addressing another issue?
    
    Richard
    

>If you view the world as having evolved as opposed to being created, or even 
>as created but then unattended, it all fits together quite nicely without 
>having to stretch for explanations. The only reason the question is hard is 
>that you are trying to reconcile a contradiction, that of an all-loving 
>all-powerful God and the obvious evil and injustice you see around you. 

If the world evolved and is simply some chance encounter between dust,
chemicals, and electricity or something, then I do not see why there should
be any moral basis for anything. Why then would we even yearn for justice or
consider the world unfair? It would simply be a matter of the most powerful
survive. Why waste our thoughts on the widowed, the father-less, the weak, the
poor? Its simply a matter of their tough luck and is of no account. Corruption,
fraud - meaningless; to the victor go the spoils and that's that. 

Our sense of what ought to be goes way beyond pragmatism, so I don't see 
pragmatism or practicality as a valid or complete answer. In the absence of
God, I see more contradiction in trying to explain love, and our desire for
justice and fairness, than I see in explaining evil and injustice in a world
created by a loving and good God. Evil and injustice are the result of a 
desire to be our own ends, our own god.

Leslie

    Leslie,
    
    I agreed with what you said until your last sentence.
    
    There is a moral order in the world.  There an absolute sense of right
    and wrong in that certain things are seen as absolutely right and
    others absolutely wrong.  There are many grey areas but grey is only a
    refinement of the natural moral order.
    
    Why do humans quest for what is right and just?
    
    Why do humans quest for Gods?
    
    Why are we born with a moral sense?

.25 JOHNSON

>If the world evolved and is simply some chance encounter between dust,
>chemicals, and electricity or something, then I do not see why there >should 
be any moral basis for anything. 

Right, you're catching on!

>Why then would we even yearn for justice or consider the world unfair? It 
>would simply be a matter of the most powerful survive. Why waste our thoughts 
>on the widowed, the father-less, the weak, the poor? Its simply a matter of 
>their tough luck and is of no account. Corruption, fraud - meaningless; to the 
>victor go the spoils and that's that. 

Why wouldn't we? Once a certain level of intelligence is reached, these 
concepts could easily be 'invented'. Just as we have (to some extent) evolved 
to the point where the law of natural selection does not apply to us, the law 
of the jungle has been (somewhat) removed also. I believe in helping all of the
people you mentioned, yet I am most assuredly *not* driven by religious 
motivations. 

>Our sense of what ought to be goes way beyond pragmatism, so I don't see 
>pragmatism or practicality as a valid or complete answer. In the absence of
>God, I see more contradiction in trying to explain love, and our desire for
>justice and fairness, than I see in explaining evil and injustice in a world
>created by a loving and good God. Evil and injustice are the result of a 
>desire to be our own ends, our own god.

It does go beyond self interest, where is the conflict? There are thousands of 
people throughout history (including Jesus) that have died for a higher ideal. 
Not all of these people were religious. Why does this idealism have to have 
been instilled from outside? It seems no contradiction to me that along with 
the concepts of love and hate, we invented this sort of nobility.

I actually agree somewhat with your last statement. Some evil and injustice are 
the results of people doing their own things without regard to others. But this 
does not cover the evil 'acts of god'. Also remember that evil to you might be 
the culmination of the desire for justice to another (most terrorist acts fall 
into this category). 

Steve

In response to Patricia's note:

>    I agreed with what you said until your last sentence.

     I've forgotten for sure, but I think you see the story in Genesis as
     a myth that explains some sort of truth. (Correct me if I am wrong).
     I see it as history, though there may be some metaphors in the story.
     Anyway, when the Temptor comes to Chava & Adam, it tells her that God 
     told a lie when He said the fruit would bring them death, instead the 
     fruit would make them LIKE GOD. Make them like God - I see that desire 
     being at the root of humanity's initial disobedience and continuing 
     rebellion.
    
>    Why do humans quest for what is right and just?
    
>    Why do humans quest for Gods?
    
>    Why are we born with a moral sense?

     I think the answer to all the questions is God made us that way. God
     made us to be in communion with Him. I've heard people say there is 
     God-sized hole in all of us that many try to fill with something else,
     but nothing else completely fills the hole. Somewhere in the Bible, it
     says God has placed eternity in our hearts. I think that means God 
     has put within us the desire not only for everlasting life, but also 
     for the One who alone is eternal by and of Himself. 

     We are born with a moral sense because we are made in the image of God. 
     I think the moral sense needs to be encouraged to take proper root.
     This is the responsibility first of the parents, and then of the 
     community and larger society. I also think the moral sense can get bent 
     or lost along the way of living due to events, circumstances, environment,
     upbringing, and giving way to the selfish desires of the heart.

     Leslie

Steve,

I sort of hear what you are saying, but I do not agree with it. I do not
see any reason for justice, fairness, compassion, and generosity to grow
out of "intelligence". Highly intelligent people can be just as cruel as
anyone else, some very unintelligent people are the most loving. I see no
correlation between intelligence and fairness, justice, compassion, and 
love.

I think the source of altriistic behavior comes from God, which I know
you do not accept as truth, but only as unfounded opinion on my part. Yet
I see no other reasonable answer to the question of why do love and a 
desire for fairness and justice exist, and not only a desire for these
things, but a definition of what these are. C.S. Lewis talks about this
in his book, "Mere Christianity". By love, I mean caring about others. 
I'm not talking about erotic or sensual love.

Leslie

    Leslie,
    
    Again I agree with everything you wrote that time as you are writing
    about the nature of humans.
    
    Where we disagree is mainly regarding the nature of the Bible and some
    erroneous conclusion about the nature of God that are derived from
    deifying the Bible itself.
    
    If the Bible itself is idolized and not subject to a rational critical
    analysis, then all sorts of wierd contradictory conclusions can be
    drawn.  i.e. a God who hates certain individuals, A God who torments
    humans, A God who plays with and toys with his creation, just because
    it is his creation and he can do whatever he pleases with it.
    
    I like you, believe that because humans are created in the image of
    God, humans are able to intuitively know what is Godly and what is not. 
    That innate capability is strenghthened by our believing and dedication
    to our God.  The more actively we try to align our behavoir with what
    we know is God's desire for us, the more in touch with that intuitive
    knowledge we become.  Through discipline, prayer, and meditation, we
    connect with that inner light which is God within us.
    
    That inner light, strenghtened by the religous life is the best
    guidance system each of us could ever have.  that inner light is of God
    and is a more accurate guidance system than any scripture produced by
    human hands.  
    
    That inner light lets us know that God does not hate Esau, that God
    does not torment individuals, and that God certainly loves each one of
    us.  That inner light lets us as women know that we do not need to
    subordinate ourselves to men, nor do we need to keep silent in the
    presence of men.  That inner light, lets all my brothers and sisters
    know that all forms of oppression based on gender, race, sexual
    orientation and nationality are wrong.
    
    Unfortunately many human things and human desires get in the way of us
    individuals fully connecting to that inner light.  Unfortunately,
    sometimes it is the holy scriptures themselves, when held to be what
    they are not, that gets in the way of living a Godly life.  Sometimes
    it is the human desire for certainty that causes some to seek certainty
    in things that are fallible and thereby loose touch with that inner
    light.
    
    Each one of us is made in the image of God.  If we have faith in that
    of God that is in each one of us, and if we work activitely to connect
    to that which is of God in us,  we will find God within our innermost
    selves.

.28, .29 Johnson

     told a lie when He said the fruit would bring them death, instead the 
     fruit would make them LIKE GOD. Make them like God - I see that desire 
     being at the root of humanity's initial disobedience and continuing 
     rebellion.

I thought the quest of all Christians is to be as God-like as possible, 
wouldn't the eating of the fruit, then, be a noble act?

     made us to be in communion with Him. I've heard people say there is 
     God-sized hole in all of us that many try to fill with something else,
     but nothing else completely fills the hole. Somewhere in the Bible, it

I too, have heard this before. Let me assure you that it is simply not 
true.

>I sort of hear what you are saying, but I do not agree with it. I do not
>see any reason for justice, fairness, compassion, and generosity to grow
>out of "intelligence". Highly intelligent people can be just as cruel as

You've sort of missed my point. It isn't individual intelligence that I'm 
referring to, it's more a minimum level of overall intelligence. Even 
your loving unintelligent person has a certain minimum level of 
intelligence, or they would not be able to express the love you describe. 
It is the capacity for self awareness, among other things. It is the 
realization that we (in general) do better when we cooperate rather than 
compete individually that begins to lead to moral codes. It is then learned 
and reinforced by society in many ways. Religion is one way, laws are 
another.

>I think the source of altriistic behavior comes from God, which I know
>you do not accept as truth, but only as unfounded opinion on my part. Yet

This is faith, which cannot be logically argued (for or against) since by 
definition it does not rest on logic. My question would then be, however, 
why is God so sparing in giving this behavior to the world?

>I see no other reasonable answer to the question of why do love and a 
>desire for fairness and justice exist, and not only a desire for these
>things, but a definition of what these are. C.S. Lewis talks about this
>in his book, "Mere Christianity". By love, I mean caring about others. 

I believe that you've touched on one of the basis for religion in general 
here. We have a question to which the answer isn't obvious, so we devise an 
omnipotent outside force to explain it. I think that the God sized hole you 
referred to earlier is this. It is a need for humans to explain things that 
are important to them, but cannot be explained. Some of us choose to fill 
this hole with something (God) and some simply choose to acknowledge that 
there is a hole in our understanding. 

BTW, some of you ask why I attend this conference; it is to help me to 
understand why other intelligent folk such as yourselves can believe so 
earnestly in something that to me has no obvious basis in reality. The 
previous paragraph touches on what I've learned from the discussions in 
here. I think that I do now, have a far more complete understanding of 
where you're coming from. 

Steve

   Steve,

   Here are my responses to some excerpts from your post:

>I thought the quest of all Christians is to be as God-like as possible, 
>wouldn't the eating of the fruit, then, be a noble act?

   That depends on what we define as God-like. The quest of a Christian
   is to be the perfect human being God created us to be. A perfect human 
   being is one who reflects God's image in that we are creative, thinking, 
   loving, just, and moral. It does not mean usurping God's place and trying
   to rule in His stead, apart from a relationship with Him. I think it is
   the latter aspect the Temptor used to alter humanity's relationship with
   God. That is what I meant in my previous note when I said they wanted
   to become like God, basically they wanted to be independent from God.

>>     made us to be in communion with Him. I've heard people say there is 
>>     God-sized hole in all of us that many try to fill with something else,
>>     but nothing else completely fills the hole. Somewhere in the Bible, it
>
>I too, have heard this before. Let me assure you that it is simply not 
>true.

   I don't think there is any reason I should accept your assurance ;-).
   I can assure you that it is wonderful to know Yeshua, and know God, but
   you would not accept that assurance either would you?

>>I sort of hear what you are saying, but I do not agree with it. I do not
>>see any reason for justice, fairness, compassion, and generosity to grow
>>out of "intelligence". Highly intelligent people can be just as cruel as

>You've sort of missed my point. It isn't individual intelligence that I'm 
>referring to, it's more a minimum level of overall intelligence. Even 
>your loving unintelligent person has a certain minimum level of 
>intelligence, or they would not be able to express the love you describe. 

   I still don't see that love grows (evolves) out of intelligence. I do see 
   that love and intelligence can work together, but I do not see love as a 
   result of intelligence. Intelligence can give love expression, but this 
   does not mean it breeds love, whether we're talking individuals or 
   generally.

>It is the capacity for self awareness, among other things. It is the 
>realization that we (in general) do better when we cooperate rather than 
>compete individually that begins to lead to moral codes. It is then learned 
>and reinforced by society in many ways. Religion is one way, laws are 
>another.

   You have not convinced me that self-giving altruism evolved from pragmatic
   cooperation.

>My question would then be, however, why is God so sparing in giving this 
>behavior [altruistic (laj)] to the world?

    Again, our viewpoints give us a different take on this. I think that
    except that God in mercy has checked the rampage of evil across history,
    we would be in a lot worse state than we are now. I think things like
    the ethnic killing in Bosnia, the skin-heads, the racists, and so on
    would be the norm were it not for God's mercy in holding back evil so
    that more people will have the ability to know Him. Why does He not
    restrain all evil? I am not sure, but maybe it has to do with giving 
    us the knowledge of where we would be without being in relationship to
    Him.

>I believe that you've touched on one of the basis for religion in general 
>here. We have a question to which the answer isn't obvious, so we devise an 
>omnipotent outside force to explain it. I think that the God sized hole you 
>referred to earlier is this. It is a need for humans to explain things that 
>are important to them, but cannot be explained. Some of us choose to fill 
>this hole with something (God) and some simply choose to acknowledge that 
>there is a hole in our understanding.

    Many have tried to answer the important questions like:
                what are here for? 
                what is life all about? 
                why is life so dear to me and yet death is the 
                 'natural' end for every living creature? 
                why am I different from my dogs and yet like them in 
                 some ways? 
                why is there unfairness? 
                why is there a concern for fairness? 
                what is love, and why do we love? 
    with things other than God. So far I have not seen any other answer that 
    satisfies all the questions. These are things that confirm my faith in 
    God, but the real reason I believe is because He answered my desire when 
    I wanted to know Him. Again this is very personal, I cannot hand you a 
    photo of God, and say here He is, or offer any empirical evidence, other
    than the complexity and inter-relatedness of the universe, the intangibles
    of human experience - love, compassion, a thirst for knowledge, ideas 
    about morality, and so on.  But I have felt His presence, I have known 
    His action in my life, I know His love. 

>BTW, some of you ask why I attend this conference; it is to help me to 
>understand why other intelligent folk such as yourselves can believe so 
>earnestly in something that to me has no obvious basis in reality. The 
>previous paragraph touches on what I've learned from the discussions in 
>here. I think that I do now, have a far more complete understanding of 
>where you're coming from.

    I wonder if you really do. Reality is such a tricky thing isn't it?
    Even self-awareness is kind of tricky sometimes.

Leslie

    The gospels support the belief that had God not restrained the world,
    all flesh would be destroyed.
    
    I believe the day will come when the restraining will be removed and
    the world will go into tribulation.
    
    -Jack

.32 Johnson

Leslie,

   I don't think there is any reason I should accept your assurance ;-).
   I can assure you that it is wonderful to know Yeshua, and know God, but
   you would not accept that assurance either would you?

Actually, I do. I understand that for YOU (and many others), knowing God has 
filled a hole in your life. My point was that I don't have that hole. By not
accepting my assurance you are saying you don't believe me? (I am unable to 
interpret the smiley in conjunction with the statement, I think I'm having a 
'bad brain day' :^). 

   I still don't see that love grows (evolves) out of intelligence. I do see 
   that love and intelligence can work together, but I do not see love as a 
   result of intelligence. Intelligence can give love expression, but this 
   does not mean it breeds love, whether we're talking individuals or 
   generally.

I don't think that love, per se, does. Many 'lower animals' express love for 
their offspring, parents, etc. without the level of intelligence that I am 
talking about. It is the intelligence that allows us to expand that love to 
others and from that grows a moral code. There is also a fair amount of 
natural selection involved in grouping together as a band, and in not being 
anti-social within that band. All of this lead logically to the creation of 
moral codes.

   You have not convinced me that self-giving altruism evolved from pragmatic
   cooperation.

And I never will. You have what you believe is a better explanation, but it is 
based on faith. One of the things I have learned from this conference is that 
once you base a belief (of anything) on faith it cannot be logically 
discussed. For you faith is a sign of courage, a plus in your life. For me, 
faith is something contrary to the way I operate in my world (And there are 
whole strings of notes that could discuss the nuances present here). One 
view isn't necessarily better than the other in all instances, they are just 
different.

Rather than an attempt to convince you, I was attempting to show that there 
could be other plausible explanations for morality, even if you don't agree 
that they are, ultimitely, THE explanation.

    Again, our viewpoints give us a different take on this. I think that
    except that God in mercy has checked the rampage of evil across history,
    ...

For you, shielded by your faith, your explanation works. For me, without 
faith, I see it as a direct contradiction to the all-loving omnipotent 
characteristics attributed to God. I ask questions such as this to try to get 
a sense for how you can reconcile this apparent contradiction.

    restrain all evil? I am not sure, but maybe it has to do with giving 
    us the knowledge of where we would be without being in relationship to
    Him.

Perhaps, but that lesson is pretty much lost on the five year old that steps 
on a land mine while playing...

    ...
    with things other than God. So far I have not seen any other answer that 
    satisfies all the questions. These are things that confirm my faith in 
    God, but the real reason I believe is because He answered my desire when 
    I wanted to know Him. Again this is very personal, I cannot hand you a 
    ...

And, for me, God does not satisfy those questions either. Many of those 
questions I have answers for that satisfy me, some of them I just realize that 
I will never be able to answer.

As for the personal touch, this too is a common theme. I believe that I know 
why this happens, but you would find the explanation much less satisfying than 
what you have :^) My question to this becomes, why does God choose to visit 
some with this personal relevation, yet leave millions of others untouched? It 
seems to me that he could 'fix the world' simply by visiting each of us in the 
way he visited you.

    I wanted to know Him. Again this is very personal, I cannot hand you a 
    photo of God, and say here He is, or offer any empirical evidence, other
    than the complexity and inter-relatedness of the universe, the intangibles

Right, you have faith :^) BTW, to me the argument around the complexity or 
inter-relatedness of the universe is completely unconvincing.

    I wonder if you really do. Reality is such a tricky thing isn't it?
    Even self-awareness is kind of tricky sometimes.

I wonder if I really do, also, otherwise why do I continue to read here? But I 
do know that I have reached an explanation that does explain most of your 
actions and words in a way that I can understand and incorporate into my model 
of 'the world'.

I've enjoyed this conversation, and learned from it. I appreciate your 
well thought out notes. Thank you.

Steve
Steve