Bosk, regarding the ancient Greeks and history. That early epochal and valuable civilisation is now history. Its bones have been picked dry. Israel and its Old Testament fulfillment in Christianity have been, and are, living it for millennia. Do you have no understanding of Peter's writings?

Priscillian, Your logic really is clogging.

Peter has expressed theology as "faith seeking understanding". Yes, it is a matter of a faith preceding the thought. Otherwise there would nothing to be understood.

However does that rule the thought and its outcomes invalid?

The understanding is in an ever changing context; time, place, society, experience, new knowledge from fact and theory.

The understanding does not remain as stored new knowledge for the Christian. Our underpinning faith, forever seeking renewal and further understanding, demands a response in life. That response is as varied as there are faithful followers of the Risen Lord.

And our faith is not static. The faith which enlightens my life is not that of the Catholic schoolboy for whom everything in his formation years in the 1950-60s, was prescribed or proscribed, and faith was expressed at "saying prayers", and being hustled along to Mass. My faith sought understanding early in a difficult marriage (now 30 years); there was an introduction to the Scriptures around a table led by a learned, grounded and faithful Priest. From there I have had my eyes open to the deeply rich heritage that spans all that is human. Including the crusty side of the institutional Roman church that I can accommodate in balance with my personal faith and acquired knowledge, most of which, but certainly not all, comes from it. I find the works of this Proddy essayist, Peter, rich in thought and spiritual insight.

In my faith there is great joy; but oh the discomfort. Now that is something those bound to the limited reason of human consciousness will never understand.

Bosk

“The Jews at the time when the Pentateuch was written down [7-6th century BCE] had not the slightest conception of history as we understand it.” I agree. Our conception of history is a recent development that is empirically based. It is focused on what actually happened, the factual basis, what we could experience if we had been there. The historical books of the OT are theologically interpreted history. This kind of history is still alive in modern nations. Gallipoli is understood as the forging place of the nation Australia. The French look back to Napoleon, the Italians to Garibaldi, the Americans to Washington and Lincoln etc. These are national history/myths. They are nationalistically interpreted history.

Just so with Israel except that whenever they projected nationhood onto historical event they came unstuck. Much of the history of Israel is about who was king, David or YHWEH, the old business of the separation of church and state. We revere the Bible because it means that we do not have to reinvent the wheel every time we turn around. Revelation is not a transfer of knowledge from the spirit world to the earthly, it is an everyday occurrence. Scientists are engaged in revelation, they reveal something that had previously been unknown.

Priscillian
No, I am not against science or scientists only the way they limit their epistemology. Jesus could not have been for or against something that only happened in the 16th century.
Serious biblical study occurs all over the world and is not influenced by whether people are interested in it or not

Peter, Of course you are right again about Jesus and science. I was being facetious in a misplaced attempt at humour. Jesus lived in days of superstition and ignorance and would have known nothing of modern science even though he was God (or the Son or whatever that infathomable Trinity thing says he was).
I have abjectly failed to lure you into a discussion of your original proposition in terms of your revealed truth. Theories of theological relativism did not exist in the time of early Chrisitian development and so I guess such a discussion would be a short one indeed. You are still one of the greatest "question beggers" I have met on this forum and I find it impossible to break your cyclical line of argument. A pity because I would like to have found out what you learnt in your years of theological study. eg. Who was Jesus, what was his message and how does it apply today.

Boxgum, "faith seeking understanding". We understand the plea, but not the logic.

“However does that rule the thought and its outcomes invalid” .

It doesn't, we all know the outcomes of your faith during the last 2000 years. Its history's there to be seen, as are the current outcomes of the expression of your faith. What you fail to understand is thats the reason your faith is rejected as loving, caring and beneficial to the world. I doubt any sensible person would doubt your faith, we see it in all aspects of society by its outcomes. Their not nice by any standards.

“In my faith there is great joy; but oh the discomfort. Now that is something those bound to the limited reason of human consciousness will never understand.”

Your right, we will never understand how someone can have faith in a failed, violent, psychologically destructive and negatively repressive belief thats contributing to the destruction of the world. Whatever you try to say, the outcome is according to the veracity of the faiths applications. That veracity is within its factual history. As Priscillian, Bosk, and others point out, the only veracity you have is in your unsustainable assertions of the books history.

What you Sells and other holders of the faith fail to understand and accept, no longer is the faith dealing with people who are unedcuated, steeped in superstition and fearful of those who appear to be superior in technology and illusion. The people of today are informed, can research, investigate and learn the true history of the world. The semantic waffle that Sells puts up, is fine for those impressed by illusional concepts that have no real or applicable substance backing them.

Irrelevant; as to how eloquently you may put it, you can't demonstrate it, point anyone towards any verifiable evidence, nor provide verifiable examples of the outcomes you so fervently express.

Sells did I read right, science only began in the 16th century. I hope I read wrong, logically it began when humans first used other than their hands to live.

It is generally accepted by historians that the dawn of science in Europe began in the sixteenth century with the Polish astronomer Mikolaj Kopernik (Nicholas Copernicus).

It goes without saying that science has been practised across many cultures but it is also true that science has ascendended to its greatest heights under the nurture of Western civilisation. During this ascendance we have seen the dismantling Christian fundamentalism.

In the present time it will once again be science and scientists that will tackle the new threat - Islamic fundamentalism. George Bush can rattle his saber all he likes, but science will take take Islamic fundamentalism apart piece by piece by using nothing more than rationalism and logic. What will be left will be Islamic moderates and a better world.

I've just spent an hour watching a David Attenborough documentary and once again learnt more about the world in that time, then in the many years when religious fanatics tried to brainwash me with their big sins, little sins, angels, devils etc, as a schoolboy.

Methinks there must be a genetic component here somewhere. Boxgum, you clearly need religion to cope with life. Hey thats fine by me,
each to their own. Some people yearn for a book of rules by which to live, we are all different.

However you are making a huge mistake, if you think that people need religion to do good or to be sensible about sex.

When HIV first became an issue, Philip Adams was one of those who made it quite clear that "buggery kills". Clearly that should be part of the curriculum of any good school sex education programme.
The Dutch have shown how effective that can be, if done well and if done in a pragmatic way. The Americans, with their religious influence, have gone down the " preach abstinance" solution, which has been shown to be a huge failure. Don't blame the secular movement if kids don't get a proper education about sex.

There are plenty of people doing good in the world, who do it because they are that way inclined, not because of the threat of fire and hell. Fiona Woods or our famous Aussie eye doctor and just two of many examples. Humans evolved as a social species and altruim is one of those charateristics that is part of that.

Ancient Greece is history, but we still study what their philosophers had to say. Ancient Israel is history, but we don't kill our neighbours anymore for working on the sabbath, as they suggested. They are history too.