[Vision2020] Longhaired Preachers (pace Joe Hill)

Joan Opyr auntiestablishment@hotmail.com
Thu, 27 May 2004 22:27:20 -0700


------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C44439.C644D180
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Eric writes in response to Melynda:

>. . . it presupposes that there's one truest religion.  =20
>There must be, because something is true. Either a god created us, or =20
>he didn't. If he did, than that makes less true the religions who =20
>believe he didn't.  Either Jesus rose or he didn't. If he did, then =20
>that makes less true the religions of those who believe he didn't.  =20
>There is a truth, therefore some guesses at it are going to be closer =20
>than others.  If you deny this, you're more of a sentimentalist than a =20
>realist.

Or, one might be a Universalist, denying none of the above but recognizin=
g the possibility of other apparently competing but in fact simultaneous =
truths.  Is God so simple that s/he can be utterly encompassed by the lim=
ited religious thought of a single people, a single denomination, or a si=
ngle individual?  What's sentimental about believing that there is more i=
n heaven and earth, Eric, than is dreamt of in your philosophy?  Or, for =
that matter, in mine?  I haven't cornered the market on right thinking, t=
hough I consider the occasional hostile takeover bid.

>I doubt there is a person on earth that has the exact understanding of w=
ho God is and the =20
>precise truth on every question of philosophy. I doubt any person has a =20
>complete understanding of the Bible. But you can bet some people are =20
>closer than others. =20

Why?  Why would God give the truth to some but not to others?  Why Yahweh=
 in Israel and Shiva and Kali and Krishna in India?  Why Jesus for you bu=
t not for me?  Attempts at argument on this point invariably fail because=
 they all boil down to the question of faith: I know what I know because =
God told me so.  Even the great C. S. Lewis was unable to leap this final=
 hurdle and win the triple crown.  'Mere Christianity,' like so many othe=
r attempts to prove that its author has the one, true answer, ultimately =
ends up biting its own tail.

>All day long you live with absolute truth, and yet when it comes to the =
matter =20
>of utmost importance, you want to deny that it exists!!  Talk about =20
>faith!  Melynda, I could have you preaching "absolute truth" in five =20
>minutes. All I would have to do is accuse you of murder and throw you =20
>in jail.  You'd be screaming "absolute truth" at the top of your lungs, =20
>and paying a lawyer to argue about it.

Ah, but now you're confusing absolute truth with objective fact.  Melynda=
 did not murder Colonel Mustard in the library with a candlestick because=
 five witnesses and a video camera place her in the cereal aisle at Tidym=
an's at the time of death.  The judicial system (in theory, anyway) relie=
s on facts, not absolute truths.  You can't skip from religion to legalis=
m without tripping on your jump rope.

>So it is clear that many who think they are Christians simply are not. T=
hey are deceiving =20
>themselves. Two people can have different interpretations of a religion,=
 but one is certainly closer to >the real truth. And when they meet God, =
they will find out who was closer.

And I'm content to wait for that day.  My objection to Doug -- and now to=
 you, since you wish that you could "coerce" the entire Palouse into beli=
eving your interpretation of the Bible -- is that you aren't prepared to =
await God's judgment.  You want to jump the gun; you want to embalm us wh=
ile we're still breathing.  Why rush the Rapture?  Why try to enshrine th=
eological ideas about heaven into secular, earthly law?  You've got three=
 score and ten years to tough it out down here and then bang, you're home=
 free.  I have no doubt that you believe we'd all be happier in your vers=
ion of paradise, but I don't want to go.  Look at it this way -- if you'r=
e right and I'm wrong, you'll never have to see me again.    =20

Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment

PS: Maybe I'll get to Heaven and God will say, "Hard cheese, honey; this =
here's Wilson country," but I'm willing to risk it.  In fact, I'm cautiou=
sly optimistic that I'll get pie in the sky when I die.


     Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer=
msn.com

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C44439.C644D180
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><BODY STYLE=3D"font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV>Eric writes in=
 response to Melynda:</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>&gt;. . . it presuppos=
es that there's one truest religion.&nbsp; <BR>&gt;There must be, because=
 something is true. Either a god created us, or <BR>&gt;he didn't. If he =
did, than that makes less true the religions who <BR>&gt;believe he didn'=
t.&nbsp; Either Jesus rose or he didn't. If he did, then <BR>&gt;that mak=
es less true the religions of those who believe he didn't.&nbsp; <BR>&gt;=
There is a truth, therefore some guesses at it are going to be closer <BR=
>&gt;than others.&nbsp; If you deny this, you're more of a sentimentalist=
 than a <BR>&gt;realist.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Or, one might be a =
Universalist, denying none of the above but recognizing the possibility o=
f other apparently competing but in fact simultaneous truths.&nbsp; Is Go=
d so simple that s/he can be utterly encompassed by the limited religious=
 thought of a single people, a single denomination, or a single individua=
l?&nbsp; What's sentimental about believing that there is more in heaven =
and earth, Eric, than is dreamt of in your philosophy?&nbsp; Or, for that=
 matter, in mine?&nbsp; I haven't cornered the market on right thinking, =
though&nbsp;I consider&nbsp;the occasional hostile takeover bid.<BR><BR>&=
gt;I doubt there is a person on earth that has the exact understanding of=
 who God is and the <BR>&gt;precise truth on every question of philosophy=
 I doubt any person has a <BR>&gt;complete understanding of the Bible. B=
ut you can bet some people are <BR>&gt;closer than others. </DIV> <DIV>&n=
bsp;</DIV> <DIV>Why?&nbsp; Why would God give the truth to some but not t=
o others?&nbsp; Why Yahweh in Israel and Shiva and Kali and Krishna in In=
dia?&nbsp; Why Jesus for you but not for me?&nbsp; Attempts at argument o=
n this point invariably fail because they all&nbsp;boil down to the quest=
ion of faith: I know what I know because God told me so.&nbsp; Even the g=
reat C. S. Lewis was unable to leap this final hurdle and win the triple =
crown.&nbsp; 'Mere Christianity,' like so many other attempts to prove th=
at its author has the one, true answer, ultimately ends up biting its own=
 tail.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>&gt;All day long you live with absolu=
te truth, and yet when it comes to the matter <BR>&gt;of utmost importanc=
e, you want to deny that it exists!!&nbsp; Talk about <BR>&gt;faith!&nbsp=
; Melynda, I could have you preaching "absolute truth" in five <BR>&gt;mi=
nutes. All I would have to do is accuse you of murder and throw you <BR>&=
gt;in jail.&nbsp; You'd be screaming "absolute truth" at the top of your =
lungs, <BR>&gt;and paying a lawyer to argue about it.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</=
DIV> <DIV>Ah, but now you're confusing absolute truth with objective fact=
&nbsp; Melynda did not murder Colonel Mustard in the library with&nbsp;a=
 candlestick because five witnesses and a video camera place her in the c=
ereal aisle at Tidyman's at the time of death.&nbsp; The judicial system =
(in theory, anyway) relies on facts, not absolute truths.&nbsp; You can't=
 skip from religion to legalism without tripping on your jump rope.<BR><B=
R>&gt;So it is clear that many who think they are Christians simply are n=
ot. They are deceiving <BR>&gt;themselves. Two people can have different =
interpretations of a religion, but one is certainly closer to &gt;the rea=
l truth. And when they meet God, they will find out who was closer.<BR><B=
R>And I'm content to wait for that day.&nbsp; My objection to Doug -- and=
 now to you, since you wish that you could "coerce" the&nbsp;entire Palou=
se into&nbsp;believing your interpretation of the Bible -- is that you ar=
en't prepared to await God's judgment.&nbsp; You want to&nbsp;jump the gu=
n; you want to embalm us while we're still breathing.&nbsp; Why rush the =
Rapture?&nbsp; Why try to enshrine theological ideas about heaven into&nb=
sp;secular, earthly&nbsp;law?&nbsp; You've got three score and ten years =
to tough it out down here and then bang, you're home free.&nbsp; I have n=
o doubt that you believe we'd all be happier in your version of paradise,=
 but I don't want to go.&nbsp;&nbsp;Look at it this way -- if&nbsp;you're=
 right and I'm wrong, you'll&nbsp;never have to see me again.&nbsp;&nbsp;=
&nbsp; </DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment</DIV>=
 <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>PS: Maybe I'll get to&nbsp;Heaven and&nbsp;God wi=
ll say, "Hard cheese, honey; this here's Wilson country," but&nbsp;I'm wi=
lling to&nbsp;risk it.&nbsp; In fact, I'm cautiously optimistic that I'll=
 get pie in the sky when I die.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>=
 <DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV></BODY></HTML><br clear=3Dall><hr>Ge=
t more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : <a href=3D'http://expl=
orer.msn.com'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>

------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C44439.C644D180--