[...] and abiding respect for theologians like C. Michael Patton who are open about the fact that their philosophies of religion are prior to the text of the Scriptures (I do appreciate honesty in a theologian), and I recognize that nobody comes to the Bible as a [...]

Recently read an amusing little statement credited to a reverend Sam Pascoe: Christianity started as a fellowship in Palestine. It moved to Greece and became a philosophy. Then it moved to Italy and became an institution. On to Europe, where it became a culture. And then it came to America where it became an enterprise.

To which an 18 year old Bible student asked: “But are we not supposed to be a body?” The teacher said: “Yes”, to which the young girl remarked that a body turned enterprise was a prostitute.

I’m not trying to be funny. I’m simply calling those who believe to return to what is described in Acts 2:42-47. 30 000 denominations?
The product of philosophy perhaps?

#John 1453.
You’d have noticed that I have not popped in for a while – have been moving from a house to a smaller place, relinquishing the bigger place to my children and grandchildren. Just unpacked the ol’ laptop.

Your response sort of proves my point. You see, I’m a he, not a she! You read beyond what is written – something Paul warned not to do (1 Cor. 4:6)

Also, stating that there is no such thing as the unadultered and unpolluted truth of the word, further proves my point as it justifies compromise as acceptable. I think Peter would have been given to one of his sporadic fits of temper just reading that compromise is deemed OK (1 Pet. 1:22-25)? And Paul? He instructs Timothy to hold on to the pattern of sound teaching, not sound philosophy, that he had heard from Paul (2 Tim 1:13). And he teaches Timothy that all Scripture (not philosophy) is profitable for teaching (NB), for rebuking (ouch!), for correcting (oh my!), and for training in righteousness (wow!), so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work (Yesssss!) . Nothing about Plato and other Greek philosophers.

On the more serious note – modern philosophying of the Scriptures have built on the abomination of the phenomenon prooftexting. If you accept that, then yes, we are worlds apart in our understanding of Scripture. I am not a Darby disciple.

Please help me now. How can there be any, but any, justification for 30 000+ denominations, all saying they are rooted and grounded in the same Bible? And on the playing field of philosophy – are you satisfied then that man was actually created on the seventh day, seeing that spiritual philosophers can prove it Scripture after Scripture? O, yes, and don’t forget that Samuel slept in the Holy of Holies, under the Ark – that’s how he heard the Lord’s voice and not Eli – this is the philosophy of a sermon on TV. If you read the Not Inspired Version (NIV) that’s a possibility given the word application in that translation.

I have been misled by spiritual philosophy for far too long. That’s why I have opted out. I have read too much in the Bible that I don’t find in church, and I’m beginning (at age 63) to understand why – too much philosophy and too little Word of God. No wonder a Jewish Christian once said (on a Sid Roth TV broadcast) she went to all kinds of churches looking for God, and not finding Him there!

And please, I’m not trying to say I have all my Scriptural ducks in a row. I’m only beginningf to learn now at an age where I should have been manifesting the kingdom power even in the little things! I no longer read the Plotzes and the whoevers to see what they say what the Bible says – I study the Bible (literally word for word in the original language) to see what it says it says. Any other, I test against that – not the other way round as I was taught by many well-menaing preachers and teachers.

mbaker, thanks. You clarified my thinking on this. I stand by my point of my experiential faith being unshakable, specifically because it s not in any way emotionally based.

I know exactly what you mean, having spent some time in a church atmosphere that encouraged an experientially based faith. And by that I mean emotionally based. And frankly, I’ve rejected many of my experiences in that setting as too emotionally based.

I think the experiences I’m referring to are different; not some kind of spectacular miraculous event, but a steady guiding (and even pushing), to places I would never have dreamed. No less miraculous, but by no means spectacular. This has played out over years. To really express it, I’d have to tell some stories and I don’t want to type that much. (Though I probably should write it all down at some point) Anyway, who I am and what I have done and where I have been is so improbable that I can find no other explanation than a divine agenda. BTW, there is nothing that others would find particularly unusual, OTOH, it’s all very ordinary, but improbable for me and my background.

This is an extreme example, but it’s almost like the Intelligent Design arguments – the situation is so improbable that the most reasonable explanation is a God-type figure. On a much smaller scale, of course, but I’m fully convinced.

Dave Z,

I can fully understand what you’re saying, and I can agree with so much of what you’ve said. God can have His hand on our lives even when we don’t know it. Looking back, I can see how many times He saved me from myself.

However, the opposite can also be true, because if we put our faith in experience before sound doctrine, we can sometimes get off onto to some very strange and even demonic paths, without even realizing it, as some in the extreme prophetic/apostolic fringe are doing.

I was involved with some of that for a while, but I think the Holy Spirit raised the red flags with me, because when I started checking my experiences objectively against what the Bible says, I see see how misled I was into thinking that all Christian natural revelation is from God.

So, while our experience can be a form of philosophical evidence, i.e. personal testimony, etc;) I don’t think it is unshakable, because our reactions to so many life experiences are to a large degree based upon how we perceive things that happen to us and to others on an emotional level. And we all know how changeable, and how powerful, an influence emotions can be for both good and evil.

I’m going to throw in another concept. I suspect I will not get much agreement. I don’t think I’m hijacking the thread, but it is a tangent.

Even without scripture, I can look back and see the effects of a force or being of some sort at work in my life on a continuing basis. (I consider much of my spiritual life to be, not something that I have done, but something that has happened to me – I am where and who I am today because I have been brought here, even carried, not because I have freely walked. At best I have merely passed through the only doors that were opened to me)From what this force/being has done, I can draw certain conclusions. This force/being has attributes: Power, Knowledge, Purpose and Love. Since I don’t ascribe knowledge or love to an impersonal force, I end up with a being, an entity.

Now, I’m informed by scripture as to the identity and nature of this being, but I’ve often wondered how I’d react if I suddenly found out that the Bible was not true, or at least not the trustworthy source we evangelicals believe it to be. Would I still have faith? In who or what?

And I end up with this; even without the revelation of scripture, I see a being at work in my life in whom I place my faith, my complete confidence, and to whom I willingly and humbly submit (in an imperfect manner).

I see the above as a form of natural revelation. Problem is, I don’t know if I can really separate my natural understanding from the revelation of scripture. The Bible is my context and my beliefs are steeped in it. But even so, I think that on the basis of my experience alone, I know without a doubt that there is a being that has been guiding my life ever since I surrendered to it.

So, is experience a form of philosophical evidence? I think so, and at the end of the day, for me, it may be the most unshakable.

Make sense?

re 34

We don’t gain additional truth by using different natural assumptions. We gain truth by testing assumptions and using the correct ones. Looking at other philosophies is a useful way of testing our reasoning and assumptions, but if God is truth, then there is one truth and not multiple truths. Thus if other philosophies start with incorrect assumptions then they are of little or no value.

Regards,
#John

Can we really separate the two? If we had not read scripture, what would we really know?

I think we can, I believe inherently within our souls we yearn for truth, a spiritualness that is unique to humanity. It is the ones that are awaken to this truth that pursues God’s way(s). Even suppose without the text of scripture on a clear moonless night looking skyward, we can only imagine in our mind, spirit and body, that we are some how linked to this great cosmic scenery, that we are not left alone nor are we are alone. Perhaps that is part of the sojourners experience here on terra firma, our longing for our home, Heaven, right.

I’m interested in seeing if Michael treats non-Western philosophy and non-Christian theology as general revelation or special revelation. If he treats them at all. Would it seem bizarre for God to reveal something to others that He hasn’t revealed to us? Maybe not, if other philosophies deal with different problems—or even deal with similar problems but from different natural assumptions.

Michael has made a good case for seriously considering natural philosophy in a study of the essence of God. However, we need to see that natural philosophy can contribute to that study apart from what we learn from the special revelation. In other words, can we really separate the two? If we had not read scripture, what would we really know?

I realized I did not explain myself on post # 27, Sleepy at night.
The 1st pic depicts a deep field view of many (waht is termed local group) galaxies. The 2nd pic is our nearest neigbor the andromeda galaxy a mere 2 million light years away. That’s right the light we see tonight left 2 million years ago. The point is the natural revelation of God is beyond our comprehenision, at least in my mind