|
Judy,
I do not know if you are aware of this, so I won't
call your behavior devious and your arguments intellectually dishonest. Instead
I will give you the benefit of doubt and simply point out that you are
committing an age-old fallacy in several of your rebuttals. The fallacy is
called a strawman argument. You twist my words and then attack them based upon
the twist. In this way you are building a strawman and then kicking it down. Let
me show you what I mean:
You said > How did Jesus
make his career looking for God in all the "wrong" places?
What's
the strawman? I did not say that
Jesus was "looking for God." He is God, always was, always will be. I said "I
like looking for him (the Lord, Jesus) in all the 'wrong' places."
You said > During his time of ministry on this earth he was still part of the
Godhead yes, but he wasn't God the Father.
What's
the strawman? I did not say
that Jesus was the God the Father. I said, "He is God, always was, always will be."
You said > I agree that He is Lord over it, but this does
not ATST mean that He is in it.
What's
the strawman? I did not say
that Jesus is in it, as if to promote some kind of strange pantheism. I
said, "I have thoroughly bought into the truth
that Jesus is Lord. He is Lord of everything. It doesn't matter what or where,
if it is in the world, he is there."
You said > It
is my belief that the Word of God can handle the enlightenment mentality sans
Polanyi. How does one put on the mind of Christ and the mind of Polanyi at
the same time?
What's
the strawman? I did not say that one should put
on the mind of Polanyi, nor did I suggest it. I have never said something
so ludicrous. I said, "Why shun Polanyi? Why not
thank our Lord that he raised him up at the time he did and equipped him to
speak to the problems present in Enlightenment
mentality?" Judy, this is an egregious mistake. Please do
not put blasphemous words in my mouth. I have always kept Christ in
the center of my theology and conversations, and I have always put whomever
I am speaking of, whether it be Polanyi or Torrance or Calvin or Athanasius
or Kruger, in the periphery and soundly in submission to Christ. Please be a
little more careful with your words.
You said > Jesus didn't speak the words of any philosopher, he only said what
he first heard the Father say - He spoke God's Words and we are to do the same
because he left us an example that we should follow in His steps. Not the steps
of Polanyi.
What's the
strawman? I did not say
that Jesus spoke the words of any philosopher; I said he spun the philosophy of
his day, and did so in a way to radically alter its intent. Please read my
words: "Long before Christ walked the earth, Confucius instructed his followers
with these words: 'Do not do to other people what you would not have them do
to you.' I think it's just too great a coincidence to imagine that
Jesus was unaware of Confucius when he told his followers, 'Do unto others
what you would have them do to you.' My point is this: Jesus took the
philosophy of his day, no doubt a popular convention, and spun it just
enough to radically alter its intent. One could be completely passive in
life, spending every day doing nothing, and still satisfy Confucius'
demand; -- not so with Jesus. It takes action to please him:
"Do unto others
..."
What's the
strawman? Secondly, I
did not say to follow in Polanyi's steps; I did say, "I do not
worship Polanyi. I worship Jesus Christ. But I do admire Polanyi's
contribution, just like I admire others for their contributions."
Judy, this is ridiculous. These
are all in just one of your posts. Look over some of your others. In other
words:
Silly woman, scarecrows are for birds. Your
strawman is lazy; he's sleeping on the job. Ravens are roosting on his
shoulders. He needs to get the boot.
Promptly.
Bill Taylor
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:59
AM
Subject: [TruthTalk] Confucius, Polanyi
etc.
I said > I like
looking for our Lord in all the "wrong" places. It doesn't surprise me to find
him working in strongholds normally given to the other side. Jesus
made it his career doing this.
jt said > How did
Jesus make his career looking for God in all the "wrong" places?
First of
all, I did not say that Jesus was "looking for
God." He is God, always was, always will be.
jt: During his time of ministry on
this earth he was still part of the Godhead yes, but he wasn't God the
Father.
I said I like looking for him (the
Lord) in all the "wrong" places. By that I mean places not commonly frequented
by highly stuffy religious types, places like university lecture halls and
science forums. I am always amazed, when I go to those places, to find that
Jesus is already there, laying the groundwork for the sharing of the Gospel. I
think he thinks he would grow old waiting for most high brows to meet him at
"church."
jt: I'm glad you believe you find
him there Bill because I sure can't see him in much that comes out of those
places.
Judy, I guess
what I'm really saying is that I have thoroughly bought into the truth that
Jesus is Lord. He is Lord of everything. It doesn't matter what or where, if
it is in the world, he is there.
jt: I agree that He is Lord over
it, but this does not ATST mean that He is in it.. He was Lord over those who
crucified Him.
That's what disturbs me about your attitude. Why in
the world should Christians be content to concede any strongholds to the
devil? There's just no getting around it, as long as we are in this world
philosophy and science are going to be major players in shaping the
way people think (Christian people included). I say, why be
afraid?
jt: I'm not saying to concede any
ground God wants to take, nor do I advocate fear which in itself is sin but
there was a time when Jesus told his followers to "leave them alone, they be
blind leaders of the blind"
Go there and be amazed to discover
that our Lord can hold his own in any climate. Start changing the
tide. Why shun Polanyi? Why not thank our Lord that he raised him up at
the time he did and equipped him to speak to the problems present
in Enlightenment mentality?
jt: It is my
belief that the Word of God can handle the enlightenment mentality sans
Polanyi. How does one put on the mind of Christ and the mind of Polanyi
at the same time?
I think if you
will bear with me a while, you'll begin to realize that your thoughts are not
as genuinely biblical as you imagine. They too have been influenced by
philosophy. If I'm wrong, you lose nothing but a little time. If I'm right,
well, you'll know what you've gained.
jt said
> Was [Jesus] a student of any kind of philosophy that you
know of?
I do not think
I would characterize Jesus as a "student" of philosophy, just like I do not
characterize myself in that way. I do know this, however, that Jesus did not
shy away from opportunities to challenge the conventions of his day. Allow me
one example. Long before Christ walked the earth, Confucius instructed his
followers with these words: "Do not do to other people what you would not have
them do to you." I think it's just too great a coincidence to imagine
that Jesus was unaware of Confucius when he told his followers, "Do unto
others what you would have them do to you."
jt: Hey a stopped watch is correct
twice a day and Satan has been around a long time and he has heard a lot also.
He puts a little poison on a lot that is true. Do you believe that what
is true is the same as truth when it comes by way of the father of
lies?
My point is this: Jesus took the
philosophy of his day, no doubt a popular convention, and spun
it just enough to radically alter its intent. One could be completely
passive in life, spending every day doing nothing, and still satisfy
Confucius' demand; -- not so with Jesus. It takes action to
please him: "Do unto others ..." Here's the short of it:
Jesus was not
intimidated by philosophy. Why should we be?
jt: No, Jesus does not manipulate,
nor does he spin anything. The Kingdom he came to present is entirely
new and "if any man be in Christ he is part of a new creation". Not just
a rehash of the old. The old has been judged. The new has come and we
need to learn the new language.
Instead, he stood it on its head.
He did not say, Oh my gosh, Confucius said so and so, and so I'd better
stay away from there. No! He took him on and set him straight.
With Christ as our Lord, we can be doing the same thing today. Thanks to
people like Polanyi, some of us are.
jt: Jesus didn't speak the words of
any philosopher, he only said what he first heard the Father say - He spoke
God's Words and we are to do the same because he left us an example that we
should follow in His steps. Not the steps of Polanyi.
judyt
"Man in his pomp is like the beasts
that perish"
Your question was
prompted by a comment I had made to Judy, pointing out the Aristotelian
nature of her holiness doctrine. She didn't recognize Aristotle's
influence on her thought. My guess is that neither did you. But I did, and
I pointed it out to her.
jt: Bill
sanctification/holiness is scriptural and the NT was not around in
the days of Aristotle.
I did this not to
attack her or to belittle her but to help her to maybe begin to realize
that one does not need to study philosophy to be captivated by its lure.
It is just as often the unsuspecting one who is hurt by philosophy as it
is the one who makes it his prerogative to know. The point is,
however, that I was not promoting philosophy over the Bible when this all
began; instead I was awakening a sister to the silent whispers of Greek
thought, when you wrote me to inquire about the philosophical
underpinnings of my own theology.
jt: Could be that western
thought is influenced by the Romans and Greeks; however, we are to die to
all that and put on the mind of Christ.
I said, "if I were
to say I adhere to a philosophy, I would look to the breakthroughs of
Michael Polanyi." Why did I say that? I said it because I understand
Polanyi and I know what he has done to free all thought, and
especially Christian thought, from Enlightenment rationalism.
jt: The mind of Christ will do
just as much to free us from Enlightenment rationalism so why do we need
to come by way of Polanyi?
I wrote to
the best of my ability, and I wrote for you and your fellow TTers to
read. Please, get your dictionary out, put it beside you, and begin to
work your way through it. It won't hurt you. And if you learn a new word
or two, then, so what, that won't hurt you
either.
jt: Thanks for being well
meaning Bill; but can we justify the use of our time this
way?
Beyond that, I do
not worship Polanyi. I worship Jesus Christ. But I do admire
Polanyi's contribution, just like I admire others for their contributions.
I know I must "work out" my own salvation (to quote Judy, and
partially quote Scripture),
jt: Hey! don't give me credit
for that, I got it from the apostle Paul who wrote "So then mty beloved,
just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much
more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;
for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good
pleasure." (Phil 2:12,13)
but I am not
so enamored as to think I have to do it all myself. Nor am easily I
intimidated -- I like looking for our Lord in all the "wrong" places. It
doesn't surprise me to find him working in strongholds normally given to
the other side. Jesus made it his career doing this. Why should
it stir you to discover the same?
jt: How did Jesus make his
career looking for God in all the "wrong" places? Was he a student
of any kind of philosophy that you know of?
Grace and Peace,
judyt
|
