|
Read my Polanyi post and get back to
me.
As far as a "Witches Coven" I don't know. I've not
been to one. But a very good friend of mine was hallucinating at a Grateful Dead
concert, when he saw a large man with flaming blond hair walk out on stage,
bible in his hand, and point to him through the crowd and say, "I coming for
you." Then the blond haired big man started pawing through people like they were
ten-pins, coming to get him. My friend fell on his face then and there, promptly
giving his life to the Lord. He is not sure about the big man, but he is
quite sure to Whom he led him.
I am saying, if it is truth, it is our Lord's
Truth, whatever the discloser.
Bill Taylor
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 6:36
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Strawman gets
the Bird
If you like looking for him in all the wrong places, how about checking
him out or his truth at a Witches Coven?
If you did not say he is in it, are you refering to his truth in
it?
So what is so great about Paloneys contribution to Christianity? Was he a
christian in more than name only?
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
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center
- File online. File on time.
|
