Jayhawker Soule

Whatever our differences, this board is somewhat of a community, and the well being of each member should be important to all of us. Given that, I can't help but be concerned about our friend, Haran.

Specifically, what if Haran should revert to his old theistic ways, only to find theistic morality, like virginity, impossible to recapture once lost? He could, of course, recall his Bible and walk around muttering such mantras as: "Don't pisseth against the wall. Don't pissith against the wall!", but that seems less than helpful. What he needs are clear answers to some pretty basic questions:

• Is there a theistic morality?
• What are its distinguishing characteristics?
• Is it the preferential domain of a specific brand of theism, or do you need to 'go all the way with Jesus' so to speak?

Let us all pray that he finds the answers.

[ April 03, 2002: Message edited by: ReasonableDoubt ]</p>

sidewinder

I'd like to address bullet #3.

1. It seems there are many interpretations of Christian morality. I think they all share some common beliefs but there are some strong differences.

2. I've never understood how the teachings of Jesus as written in the four canoncial gospels fit into Christian morality, or just the Christian life in general. It seems most Christian use a pick and choose approach.

3. I'm not talking about taking everything literally. I realize that some teachings of Jesus are not meant literally. But what about the plain and clear teachings of living your life without worrying about anything. What about living in a communal setting, like the early Christians did, as told in the book of Acts? What about selling all you have to the poor? What about not judging anyone? What about not retaliating against enemies and letting them strike you again?

4. It seems more emphasis is placed on Paul's teachings, and the rest of the NT teachings (outside of the gospels) which are emphasized in how Christians should live their lives. You would think that Yahweh incarnate's teachings would be more important than any other teachings but it doesn't appear to be the case.

Sojourner553

You go to far for my tastes, ReasonableDoubt. Can't we stick with discussing the issues in a respectful manner without trashing personalities.

I don't like some of Haran's ideas -- but I try not to apply that to him personally

I did tell him once that his rigid interpretation of dogma was not unlike how Muslim terrorists unquestioningly followed their beliefs.


He insisted from that, I was calling him a terrorist. That was his PERCEPTION though of what I said, not what I INTENDED him to get out of it.

Lighten up! I don't like seeing anyone trashed!

Sojourner

[ April 03, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>

Jayhawker Soule

Tastes, of course, differ, but I do congratulate you on this, one of your shorter posts.

Sojourner553

Ha, ha. Great critique of my form...
Do you wish to add anything on substance?

Sojourner