Mail
me comments, suggestions, warnings, flames, whatever Dear Mr. Lature,
Please forgive that I am young and don't know much about
theology, but I recently read your Web pages about "What is a
Christian" and "Creation Spirituality". I found your theology
very interesting... but confusing, and I would like to know
more about it.
I was first confused on your views of the Bible. You said
that you had great respect for it, but you do not believe that it
is the direct words of God. I have great respect for the Bible,
because I have always thought of it as the direct word of God. But
if the Bible isn't the word of God then what is? Where does man
find God's will? Can everyone just make up what they believe is
God's will? If that is true then it all seems like fairy tales.
On a similar note, I was confused by your views on "other"
religions. It seems that you were saying that they are all true.
It seems illogical that two religions that have opposing views- such
as on the question of how many gods there are- could both be true.
Or do you believe that all religions have truth in them, but none
are totally true? In that case how do we decide what is true in
our own religion? Maybe the part of your religion that says that
all religions are true is the false part of your religion. (Do you
see how it gets confusing?)
I guess what I am saying that it seems that there is only one
reality and one truth. Out of everything I have ever read or heard
the Bible seems to have the most truth. What evidence do I have
that any of it is false? What evidence do you have? At this
point in my life as a Christian I have decided to base all my
beliefs on the Bible, what else can I base them on? I can't just
take your word for it, because the Bible has better credentials than
you do. For this reason I am not ready to convert to "Creation
Spirituality" but I am interested in learning more about it.
Thankyou for your Time I look forward to hearing
from you.
David,
At 02:08 PM 11/4/95 PST, you wrote:
> I was first confused on your views of the Bible. You said
>that you had great respect for it, but you do not believe that it
>is the direct words of God. I have great respect for the Bible,
>because I have always thought of it as the direct word of God.
The problem is in the words "direct". If the Bible says in the words of the Psalmist "Blessed is he who smashes their little ones against the rocks", I find it hard to imagine this being the direct words of God. I have to believe it is the feelings of the Psalmist, letting his anger and nationalistic feelings influence his view of what God wants.
I think we have less than a "pure revelation" represented in the words of Scripture. I find it to be , like you, the best guide we have, but we must take into account the "channel" through which the words come: through fallible, emotional humans who are somewhat influenced in many ways by their own culture.
> But if the Bible isn't the word of God then what is? Where does man
>find God's will? Can everyone just make up what they believe is
>God's will? If that is true then it all seems like fairy tales.
Like I said in the previous parapgraph, it is not easy to find God's will. Even the "accepted", popular interpretations of Scripture can lead us far astray. Just look at how the slave holders used the Bible to justify their position. And the religious leaders of Jesus' day were certain that Jesus could not be the chosen one because Jesus did not fulfill the expectations of their interpretation of the passages they considered to be referring to the coming Messiah. We might say, well they just didn't know Jesus. My question to 20th Century American Christianity is "do we?"
> On a similar note, I was confused by your views on "other"
>religions. It seems that you were saying that they are all true.
No, I believe they all HAVE some truth, including our own style of Christianity. I say "our own style, because I do believe Christianity points me to THE truth. But I also do not believe that the brand of Christianity we have (this almost 21st Century, American, middle class version) is being all that true to the teachings of Jesus.
There are people in other religious traditions that truly do more closely follow the teachings of Jesus than do so-called followers of Jesus who call themselves "Christians".
I believe also that to "believe" in Jesus implies that you "live by" what Jesus was and taught. If you do not identify the teachings you live by as "Christian" or from Christ, it makes no difference. If you live according to the light (which I believe is Jesus, incarnate in the lives and affairs of men), then you "believe" in Jesus, no matter what you call that "experience" intellectually. In fact, the word "believe" comes from the Latin that means "by life" or, "what you live by".
>It seems illogical that two religions that have opposing views- such
>as on the question of how many gods there are- could both be true.
Many religions that claim there are more than one God are simply psychological expressions of some kind of complexity in life.....like the seemingly separate events of nature, sex, hunting, and love. The same religious system could also, under the same roof so to speak, have ideas of social justice and love for neighbor which may well be lived out more consistently than people who identify with our more "rational, civilized" system in monotheistic religion.
Now I believe in a monotheistic God, but I also believe in how God is present in all of creation, since it is quite literally a part of God's actual self----part of God is in all.....and in a very unique way in humanity. For some less "scientific" culture to place "theistic" roles upon other "areas" of life does not seem all that wacko to me. The important lesson is to be able to hear the voice of divine call, and to be able to "test the spirits" to see if they are from God. It's a dangerous path, because there are all kinds of religious expressions, and not all are healthy, even the "Christian" ones .
>Or do you believe that all religions have truth in them, but none
>are totally true?
I think all of them ultimately end up in the story of Jesus, since it is in this story (which is also tied to history) that God comes into human life, and gives us a big hint about what faithful living under God looks like.
The ones who have not gotten the chance to see this story have missed a potentially very enlightening experience, but alas, so have the ones who have been shown a very limited and narrow Jesus. The ones who teach us about Jesus have a very deep responsibility, because what they leave out is very difficult to find, and also what they affirm is often so difficult to "shake off" when it has led us astray.
> In that case how do we decide what is true in
>our own religion?
It takes quit a while. I'm still "weeding it out". I think I'm on the right path, but it's a lifelong learning.
> Maybe the part of your religion that says that
>all religions are true is the false part of your religion. (Do you
>see how it gets confusing?)
I don't even think that all of Christianity's expressions are true, so how could I think all religions are true? NO, you've misunderstood me there. I just think that the Christ of Scripture, of history, and of the God of the universe, is ever active in history and in our lives. Including those of other cultures. I do NOT believe that someone HAS to have heard a specific story of Jesus and pray all the right stuff to be "with God". They do, however, have to respond to a call to forever seek the truths which must, in ALL cultures, be followed often in spite of forces in any society which seek to mold people into selfish, greedy, uncompassionate creatures.
> I guess what I am saying that it seems that there is only one
>reality and one truth.
Only one reality about what?
> Out of everything I have ever read or heard
>the Bible seems to have the most truth.
Agreed. Where do I say otherwise?
> What evidence do I have
>that any of it is false? What evidence do you have? At this
>point in my life as a Christian I have decided to base all my
>beliefs on the Bible, what else can I base them on?
But what "interpretations" of the Bible do you base them on? There is one Bible , but there are many interpreters.
> I can't just take your word for it, because the Bible has better credentials >than you do.
I would say it does.
> For this reason I am not ready to convert to "Creation
>Spirituality" but I am interested in learning more about it.
It's not a "different religion" like it seems you think it is. It's just an "interpretation" which is extensively based on the Bible. IN many cases, I believe it does a better job of "being Biblical" than most of the so-called "Bible-believing churches".
> Thank you for your Time I look forward to hearing
>from you.
Thank you for writing. Please feel free to share your reactions to anything I have said here.
Also, would it be OK if I copied your letter to my pages as I have done with many others I have received?. I can do it either WITH your name and email address, only your name, or totally anonymously, or not at all if you wish.
I wish to make this site more interactive. Let me know. And may God bless you on your journey of faith. I'm glad you have become a part of mine in bringing me these questions.
Back to New Media Communications Home Page
Back to Internet Theological Seminary Table of Contents
Back to my "What is a Christian" page