But Gibo, the spirit that you advocate, seems to require a tightly closed mind so all problems with ‘the’(sic) bible will hopefully vanish, and you’ll have no trouble with God dictating to Moses that the Decalogue was given at both Sinai and Horeb, and dictated Moses’ own death in the past tense, and one genealogy being dictated to one evangelist and a different one to another evangelist. And whereas we are told that Jesus is the ‘Logos’, translated as the ‘Word of God’, there is no mention that ‘the bible is the Word of God’, thus an unbiblical concept, where presumably you’re taking the ‘word’ to be the ‘written word’. Jesus wrote nothing, and made no mention that his message would be all written down as a kind of text book. There is only that reference from Paul that ‘all inspired literature is useful for teaching ...’ by which presumably he meant the Septuagint and other current literature circulating around the communities. But I also see under this umbrella the works of such as Shakespeare, C.S.Lewis ... to even our own Henry Lawson, Tim Winton, or any who can give us insights into our human condition, and lead us to act justly, to love tenderly and to walk humbly with God. Furthermore that spirit telling you interpretation is just what you concoct the meaning to be, that the message is quite subjective, seems quite dangerous, and that anyone, wise or kooky, can start another sect. Jesus regretted that those against him, like wolves, scattered his flock, which made scatterers his enemies, and so subjective interpretation of his message, that has produced the plethora of sects tearing the Christian fabric into so many ragged strands, has destroyed the unity he prayed for. The spirit that you talk about, seems to be that of the scatterers, producing mischief, sometimes eventually like Jonestown. I doubt this is the Holy Spirit, whose truth is to free us from closing our minds and open us up to appreciate the working of this spirit throughout history with weak and all to human instruments.

That was a maze of thought AveAtqueVale.
Where did that come from.

Like most born again christians Im more than happy to KEEP IT SIMPLE and trust that "All scripture is inspired by God"...2 Timothy 3:16... and this is how it got Written.

After all... its all about a simple faith and trust in God through Jesus Christ, not great "egghead" thinking, that the Word works.
A good christian friend warns me to "keep it simple stupid".
And he's right!

I usually find that those who like to either attack the Bible, or pick it to pieces, looking for things that arent there, have a fear problem.

The Word frightens them and threatens their theories about life etc...i.e. "Im a good person...God wouldnt send me to hell"

You see...if we accept the Bible, we have to accept that what it says about sin and Judgment, is true.
Because most wont admit they sin against God, and are therefore sinners, they let the fallen nature turn the truth of Gods Word around to justify their sin, and they reject what the Word says to protect themselves from such thoughts as "a Judgment" and give themselves comfort in the now... rather than accept that they are sinners in Gods Sight and turn to what Jesus Did on the cross and recieve that work in their lives by making Him Lord and Saviour.

They say Voltaire spent much of his time attacking the Holy Bible and christians and then on his death bed was found screaming that he could feel the heat of the flames...then he died.
Fear had made him what he was.
He would have been wiser to accept that sin was in him, and received
Jesus as His Lord and Saviour, and had Jesus overcome his "falleness".
We are not to let personal fear stop us from going to Jesus to get set free.

http://spiritlessons.com/Mary_K_Baxter_A_Divine_Revelation_of_Hell.htm

Greg C,

Indeed, Volume 3 (up to p.306 at least) is a delight to read.

The letters are inspirational on a number of levels – not least to encourage us to write with humility and honesty in our every communication, but also to get back to the joy of real letter-writing (forget Facebook!).

It was wonderfully refreshing, to see Lewis sum up the Richard Dawkinses, Christopher Hitchenses and Sam Harrises of the time:

An example From the letter to Bernard Acworth (p. 138):

“I have read nearly the whole of Evolution* and am glad you sent it. I must confess it has shaken me: not in my belief in evolution, which was of the vaguest and most intermittent kind, but in my belief that the question was wholly unimportant. …. What inclines me now to think that you may be right in regarding it as the central and radical lie in the whole web of falsehood that now governs our lives, is not so much your arguments against it as the fanatical and twisted attitudes of its defenders.”

(*Bernard Acworth, “This Progress: The Tragedy of Evolution”)

(There is a fair bit of evidence here on OLO that not much has changed).

I am quite unabashed to acknowledge that I enjoyed this (though we may never know if poor Acworth felt the sting in Lewis’ dismissal of his arguments!) just as much as “A ham is not a ‘small thing’, but a glorious creature.” - from the very next page.

And to Mrs Frank L. Jones question - “Why did God make most people stupid” on p.10:

"Have you any evidence that He did?
Some people are stupid through their own choice – laziness, and even fear of the truth – so have made themselves stupid. Others, through bad education etc., which is the fault of other humans, not of God."

A Lewis precursor to the “sound bite”? There are many in the Letters, and it is well to read them lest we fall into the mistaken assumption that anything penned by our contemporaries passes as original thought.

The maze is an appropriate analogy for my searching Christianity, that amongst the many paths ending at a dead end, maybe there is one which is valid as a philosophy for my life. I take as axiomatic that there is a spiritual dimension to life and that God is a rational being, and so writers like C.S.Lewis are helpful. But the statement that ‘the bible is the word of God’ bears examination. Now it is not obviously self-evident, and the bible itself makes no such claim to internal validation, so the statement is just an hypothesis and requiring external validation. But definitions of the terms ‘bible’ and ‘word’ elude definitive meanings. Validation could appeal to an authority. However claiming ‘God’s dictation’ is contradicted by the many different styles of vastly differing standards of writing that defy a singular dictating source. And what is said to be God inspired has its own peculiarities as Obadiah is apparently dictated by God, but not Ben Sirac who’s remarkable wisdom is confined to the not-inspired basket. Neither is that prayer in the Book of Common Prayer called “ Benedicite” is categorized as not inspired yet seems to be one of the best prayers of all time. If subjective interpretation is put as validation to the above hypothesis, it simply makes a nonsense of any rational search for the truth. To tightly close the mind to discussion looks simply like sitting at a dead end of the maze with eyes tightly shut, imagining you’re secure in your simplicity. And this might even be a mischief. Jesus was harsh on those calling ‘Lord, Lord’ and telling Him their devotion, but He pointed out He didn’t know them and they weren’t with Him. So just blindly claiming simplicity of faith as justification may if fact be destructive, and instead of building up Christianity, may in fact be white-anting it, with consequent denunciation by Jesus. But enough of this; I’m partly to blame for hi-jacking the discussion off Lewis, so this is my definite ‘vale’, and getting back onto the essential Clive S.

AveAtqueVale

Thank you for the advice contained in:

“So just blindly claiming simplicity of faith as justification may in fact be destructive, and ....may in fact be white-anting ...”

When you describe God’s existence, his character and the invisible – what is not seen, but a matter of faith for believers – as self-evident, then I can only conclude that you arrive at this conclusion not through your academic studies, or your faith position, but through your interpretation of the natural world as you’ve experienced it.

Truly, many come to Christ through the Word. But historically, many have responded to God’s creation (the world around us, the soul within us), with belief in (a) God. Other conversions, are more of the Paulian variety – dreams and visions…particularly where there is no access to the Word.

“Jack” offers up some useful advice here too, in his discussion on the “natural” and the “adopted” sons (daughters), I found that in Vol. 3 – and it is a theme elaborated elsewhere in his literature.

Perhaps it is easier to take the existence of God for granted, when you were born with a heart to know and respond to Him (as it appears you were). I was quite obstinate, refusing to acknowledge God’s glory as manifested in his creation, until the Gospel of Mark penetrated that flimsy pretence, so that finally, what was hidden, was revealed.

If you are willing to re-visit the Gospels (I understand your objections to authorship, the definition of scripture, the authority of the Word, however, an open mind is still a requirement for a scrupulous examiner) you may well find that your search ends there (any of the mainstream bible versions will do – KJ, NIV etc. – let's not get into a tangle about it), though in the end, it can only be “seen” with the eyes of the heart.

It's the "This Way is Out" sign from the maze - or you can do another few circuits for good measure. Either way, I wish you “God-speed” in finding the definitive answer to your sincere and thorough research.

"In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with God, and The Word was God"...1 John 1.

So it is...we believe in The Word of God.

Im happy to go to The Lord as a child wherever possible.

Im one of the stupid ones who really, truly needs to keep Christianity simple.
Im surrounded by many others in the christians churches I attend.

Too much questioning and complexity and I can lose what Ive been Given.

Good talking to you AveAtqueVale:)