Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
9 years ago  ::  Jan 24, 2009 - 9:24AM #11
Dutch777
Posts: 9,144
[QUOTE=holst;1036385]I agree with the earlier post which I think quoted CS Lewis who said that such ideas (in this case by Spong) omits eons of thinking and study.
Eons of thinking and study do not assure either truth or facticity.  Eons of thinking and study have convinced the medical profession that post-surgical sepsis, yellow fever and malaria were caused by atmospheric miasma.  Eons of thinking and study convinced scientists that darker racers are intrinsically inferior, the earth is 6,000 yrs. old, that women are incomplete males and intellectually inferior, etc.,etc., etc.

The arguement from chronologic length is falacious and CS Lewis should have known better than to make such a fallacious statement. 




According to Spong, would the fate of all human souls be the same, no matter what?[/QUOTE]
I've read most of Bp.Spong's books and have never come across such a concept enunciated by him.   As Bob has already indicated, most if not all, of Bp. Spong's material is predicated upon research done by first rate scholars in the field of biblical studies rather than his own personal research.  He's a popularizer of what  has been, over the past hundred years, published in the scholarly journals and peer-reviewed.

Those who disagree with his popularizations of the research of other scholars are well advised to do so on the basis of equally researched facticity rather than on the basis of having their prior unresearched beliefs challanged.
:)
The Path
To Moon
lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own
DharmaPath
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Jan 24, 2009 - 9:57AM #12
Dutch777
Posts: 9,144
[QUOTE=birwin2229;1039829]C S Lewis the Anglican protagonist of the last century would also ask of Spong: if you reject many of the basics of historic Christianity, why do you not do the honest thing and deny being a Christian altogether?.[/QUOTE]

Whoever knows what the late CS Lewis would ask Bp.Spong is a devotee of seances.:)

"Historic Christianity" has, from its earliest roots, contained a plethora of beliefs, understandings and interpretations and to claim otherwise is counterfactual and disingenuous.  You might wish to read some of the excellent work on this subject by Bart Ehrman.   Furthermore, to suggest that one deny one's Christianity in order to cherish facticity and intellectual honesty is to claim covertly that Christianity is compatable with neither.
The Path
To Moon
lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own
DharmaPath
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Jan 24, 2009 - 7:30PM #13
birwin2229
Posts: 53
I take it your use of 'seance' was a joke or terribly naive. If the latter let me quote C S Lewis talking of men like Spong he wrote 'Men who have passed beyond these boundary lines (referring to unrthodox beliefs)  ... are apt to protest that they have come by their unorthodox opinions honestly. In defence of these opinions they are prepared to suffer obloquy and forfeit advancement. They thus come to feel like martyrs. But this simply misses the point which so gravely scandalises the layman. We never doubted the unorthodox opinions were honestly held: what we complain of is your continuing your ministry after you have come to hold them. We always knew that a man who makes his living as a paid agent of the Conservative party may honestly change his views and honestly become a Communist. What we deny is that he can continue to be a Conservative agent and to receive money from one party while he supports another.'
So with Spong: as you point out he has taken the views of some Biblical scholars of the last 200 years and rejected the orthodox teachings of the Anglican Church, yet he continues to be paid by that church.
Of course historically the church has had a wide variety of views on many matters but The Historical Christian Faith has weathered all these storms of dissent and still maintains its historic beliefs as expressed in the creeds of the  church such as the 39 articles etc.
No one suggests that cherishing faciticiy and intellectual honesty is covertly rejecting Christianity. This misses the point of Lewis' argument.
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Jan 25, 2009 - 9:34AM #14
Dutch777
Posts: 9,144
Bp. Spong continues to receive financial income from TEC because his pension rights are vested and cannot be alienated.

He suggests that certain received beliefs are not necessarily compatable with contemporary knowledge and that such beliefs be re-examined in the light of that knowledge.  If you disagree, then you're entitled to do so.  This is actually the modernist controversy which has been raging for the past 150 years.  Orthodox Christian belief held that Creation occured 6,000 B.C., as detailed by Anglican Bishop Ussher.  Some Christians still hold to that belief although that has become untenable in  the light of modern science.  If one belief may be re-examined, so may others.  If you disagree, that's your prerogative.  OTOH, I would relinqish that which is no longer tenable in the light of emerging knowledge.
.
The Path
To Moon
lake
Doesn't Go
There.

So Walk
Your own
DharmaPath
And Be
Mindful

Dutch
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Jan 25, 2009 - 4:24PM #15
birwin2229
Posts: 53
I agree that Christianity should be subject to critique if it is a reasonable faith. Bishop Ussher was wrong because he misused the Scriptures . Of course scientific knowledge is vital. As I see it we have two books: the book of nature and the Scriptures. They are complementary and not in opposition. Each one has its role. I agree that emergent knowledge must be listened to. i still think an honest enquirer who finds Christianity wanting should do the honorable thing and leave . Each man to his own belief!
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Jan 25, 2009 - 5:02PM #16
RJMcElwain
Posts: 3,013

birwin2229 wrote:

I agree that Christianity should be subject to critique if it is a reasonable faith. Bishop Ussher was wrong because he misused the Scriptures . Of course scientific knowledge is vital. As I see it we have two books: the book of nature and the Scriptures. They are complementary and not in opposition. Each one has its role. I agree that emergent knowledge must be listened to. i still think an honest enquirer who finds Christianity wanting should do the honorable thing and leave . Each man to his own belief!



Someday, when you have a chance to read some of Bishop Spong's writings, you'll find that he is still well within the bounds of reasonable Christian doctrine. And, as he'll tell anyone, he's not the research scholar who has developed many of today's modern Christian thought, but merely the communicating agent. His thoughts are very widely expressed by many prominent Christian Scholars.

Robert J. McElwain

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Supposedly)Thomas Jefferson

"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral."
St. Thomas Aquinas

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. Plato
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Apr 30, 2009 - 10:48PM #17
Solidgranit.com
Posts: 305

I have not read the man's writings but this statement from his interview was worrisome...


"Our problem is not that we have fallen from some pristine perfection into a sinful state from which we need to be saved, it is that we need to be empowered to become something that we have never been, namely fully human beings. So the idea that I need a savior to save me from a fall that never happened and to restore me to a status that I never possessed is in our time all but nonsensical."


 


This statement of his seems to deny the Biblical account by taking aspects of Christian theology to suit the opinions of the interpreter.  There is not a single ancient Christian writer or a single book in the Bible that accounts for that view.  Why are the people in this debate mentioning him debating 200 yrs of Chrstian theology... Christian theology began before the Bible and the best evidence we have is of early Christian letters.  This seems to be the logically liberal extention of the Roman Catholic doctrine of Progressive Revelation that was inherited by the Angelican Church.

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Jul 06, 2009 - 7:42PM #18
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

I will side with 2000 years of Church teaching over what a man has said in contradiction to the consensus of the Church.


Furthermore I take the teachings of Christ over any thing else. He described hell as a place where the flame is not quenched and worm does not perish. Not exactly where I would want to spend eternity. He described heaven as where He was we would be with Him.


Jesus backed his claims by dying on the Cross for our sins and being raised for our justification. Unless Bp. Spong can do likewise, I'm sticking with Jesus Christ as my savior.


  

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook