« Best Bible Study Tool | Main | Marriage Law »

November 15, 2012


Paraphrasing Alan:

The Bible addressed issues relevant to the culture at that time...it wouldn't make any sense for God to address, say, cyber-crime, or embryonic stem-cell research...

I think a better way to look at it is this: those issues are not really the issue. For example, cyber-crime, that's not the real issue that needs to be addressed from a Biblical perspective, is it? It's merely a symptom. However, things like crime, in general, and theft/lying/etc., specifically, ARE addressed in the Bible.

My point overall (and it's quickly climbing up the ranks of things that irk me about this so-called "Christian" culture we claim to live in) is that the Bible is far less silent than what we give it credit for. It's not just some general guideline document; I think it specifically speaks to a myriad of circumstances that are incredibly relevant to today's issues. I think the confusion about this lies in the phenomenon that Christians today (at least from what I see in America) are far less familiar with the Scriptures than they ought to be...

There are so many ways to approach this. To start...........

An important gift specific (somewhat) to the Gospels is that they show us the target of God's love and attention through those things Jesus loved and gave attention too. Namely, People, and, well, our interior condition. He embraces the worst of us and invites everyone from the rich young ruler to the whore and thief to the Righteous Priest Nicodemus to come into His Kingdom. Whatever is “Person” qualifies for His embrace without any regard to one’s resume’ or Curriculum Vitae. He dives into our physical pain, and He even dives into our deaths. Only, He cautions us that there is a Final End to pain and death yet to come, and in the Gospels He shows us that too, in Himself, in His own resurrection. He points all our hopes towards Him and Tomorrow and away from Self and Yesterday, and reminds us that the End Game is not our Body or our current World, but is our Wedding with Him yet to come. C.S. Lewis echoes this and recalls his wish to have his wife, who had died, back with him, “I want to have her back as an ingredient in the restoration of my past. Could I have wished her anything worse? Having got once through death, to come back and then, at some later date, have all her dying to do all over again? They call Stephen the first martyr. Hadn't Lazarus the rawer deal?”

Jesus touches on all our pains, all our guilt, all our fears, and even our death, and, He focuses us forward rather than backward, upward rather than downward, and He drives us to focus our love not *only* on Self, but, to love not only Self, but to also launch out and love Other, both the Uncreated Other (God) and the Created Other (People), and to love these two without reserve. He traces All-Things back to Person, both Vertical and Horizontal. He tells us "All Things" come down to those Two Acts and therein addresses all possible scenarios in our world and in our humanity. Jesus loves and pays attention to all that is *Person*, to all that is *Personhood* and to the condition, position, stage, and form of that Person's Soul, Mind, and Spirit. He does not address "Things People Do" but rather He, Jesus, address, loves, and gives His attention to "The People Doing the Things". Love made Flesh aims at the End Game rather than at superficial bobbles which are not in themselves real-things. He does not aim at Slavery, for He knows there just is no such Real-Thing that is “slavery” for all things are traced back, always, to Personhood. Slavery is a non-thing for it is a Non-Person, Non-Mind, Non-Personhood. In Love’s Economy All-Things “real” are Person-Dependent, Mind-Dependent, Personhood-Dependent. God aims at only Real-Things and He knows there are only Slave Owners and Slaves, for Person/Personhood is the Bedrock of, well, All-Things. The God Who Is-Love aims at the real-entity which we call the Slave Owner, and that He does One-on-one amongst the I and the You, for the I and the You are the bedrock of, well, All-Things up there in the Triune and down here in the Triune’s Creation. And God wins him, that bastard and that monster. He dives into that filthy beast and therein begets the Singular-We, the I-You, and the bastard is overcome. He breaks him. He fills him up with Himself, and makes of him quite another sort of a fisher of men. Amazing Grace is written wide and far on this planet and its repercussions are still rolling up-hill. All social engineers, whether Secular or Theistic, know that until the Minds and the Hearts of the People are changed, everything else is nothing more than a bandage, nothing more than bandages and temporary hopes soon to collapse beneath the weight of what lies within Persons. We love our bandages. We really love our bandages. God loves taking our bandages off.

I'm sorry to say I'm unimpressed by either response. Allow me to explain why.

First it is suggested that God could not have addressed certain modern concerns due to the way he wanted to use the Biblical authors. Apparently God didn't want to override the cultural sensibilities of his human instruments, and so this prevented him from discussing stuff like stem cell research or cloning, etc.

The problem with this response is that it's a complete mystery (to me at least) why God should value the cultural sensibilities of the Biblical authors more than delivering clear and unambiguous teachings on modern moral issues. It sure seems to me like the latter is much more important! In fact, I don't see any reason whatsoever for God to refrain from informing his Biblical authors about matters of the distant future.

The second response to the challenge essentially denies that God should be interested in giving us further instructions, because, according to Brett, the instructions given are quite sufficient. Or at least, they're supposedly sufficient once one has studied enough science and philosophy.

But I see a couple of problems with this approach, too. On one hand, I disagree that the Bible, science and philosophy combined have given us sufficient instructions for every single moral issue. Take human cloning for instance. It might be argued that this is in practice immoral since it involves the destruction of embryos. However suppose we are able to develop technologies to clone humans without destroying embryos in the process. Will it then still be immoral to clone humans? It's hard to see how a Christian could reasonably deny that there is room for rational disagreement on that question.

And on the other hand, Brett seems to acknowledge that even if the Bible is enough when used with science and philosophy, nevertheless we still need science and philosophy in order to get by. In other words, he seems to acknowledge that the Bible isn't enough all by itself. We still need his favorite philosophical and/or scientific arguments to get from Biblical instruction to settling certain modern-day moral questions. We see this all to clearly when he presents such an argument in the video. So his response does not avoid the challenge; he still needs to explain why God didn't just give us what we need in Scripture alone.

Apparently Ben feels a few hundred pages of bandages would be sufficient. Appropriate for one who shuns Word/Mind as a living bedrock for all Knowing.


I guess you'll want to have "Knowing" both ways again. All Mind, but not really; all artificial programming, but real; and all knowing of all Mind compressed into 8 or 9 hundred pages, but not Contextual.


Instead of waffling, why don't you actually try to respond to Ben's points?


I did in my initial post prior to Ben's. He typically tries to define all points by his own terms. I'm satisfied with Person/ Mind/ Personhood as the always-current and living bedrock of Knowing as per my post. I'm also satisfied with the OT's & NT's own assertion that they themselves are the Incomplete, while the Total is yet to come.

The question has a narcissistic/culture-centric element to it. (My era is, of course, the most important.) Going with the question's logic: I wonder then why God would not address ethical issues say of 500 years from now? Perhaps 1000 years and beyond. How about the issues of the 1400/1500s and world exploration by the Europeans? How big would the Bible have to be if it addressed every major issue of every major century from AD 100? Silly. Better to give principles, demonstrated in real world events of the time it is written. Better to teach a person to fish/think than constantly give him fish/answers.


Good point. I wonder how many pages a book like that would have to have. Right now we have 1000 pages or so. I find it odd that people really think, or at least pretend to think in their assertions, that a 993,456, 937,577 page book would be given by God. He has something more Alive, more Full, more Ever-Present and Ever-Current. He gives to us the Created Person, the Created Mind, Himself, the Uncreated Person, the Uncreated Mind, and, therein, in Knowing Him, in Knowing the All-Context, all possible worlds are touched at the End of all our little ad infinitums. Love Himself, that Uncreated Self, pours Himself out, and into, and unto, His Created Other. Of His Written Law He warns us: This is a Taskmaster; to perpeutally frustrate you till you come to, to.... to Person, to "Me". Of His OT and of His NT He warns us: our current Knowledge and Prophecy will pass away; this is all the Incomplete. The Total is yet to come. What lies ahead is, simply, that I-You-We of Love's Triune. Person. Mind. Personhood. The Bedrock of "Know".

Mbabbit makes an excellent point.

We might also note that the challenge doesn't take itself far enough even if we eliminate the implicit cultural chauvinism and end up with the nearly one trillion page book that SCB-LHRM (rightly) thinks would result.

After all, God knows all ends and all the choices and chances that will lead to them. Why didn't He have the authors write down every choice that would ever be made by every person and tell them what to do in each and every case?

He could have thrown in a line about whether I should be writing this blog comment or mowing my lawn. Why didn't He?!! Then either my wife or I would have an ironclad WIN in the argument that I know is coming!

Sure, He'd have to create a few more planets consisting only of wood pulp that we could mine for the paper needed for the writing. And a few more planets covered with bookshelves to contain the manuscripts. But, as Ben would, I'm sure, like to point out, this is the Omnipotent God we're talking about!!

Instead, He gave us the Incarnate Word.

And that's what the Bible is about. It's most important function is not, ultimately, to help us always make the right choice. It's to show us that we never will. Even when we might think we're making the right choice, if we look hard and are honest with ourselves, there's some wickedness in it.

To show us that, Jesus gave us nice homely examples like being angry at your neighbor or lusting after his wife (which are really violations of the last two commandments regarding coveting). I'm pretty sure that those sins have always been, and will always be, with us.

The main point is to drive us to the cross on which the Incarnate Word died for the sin of the world.


“This time” you really should have chosen to go tend to your lawn rather than to this blog. But, there will be other “times” with other “Contexts” and, in case you have not read your Bible, seventeen days from now when the TV commercial you note in your peripheral vision brings to your mind that chair you once sat in at your great aunt’s house 29 years ago, and, that thought then makes you wonder about her lawn, and then your lawn, and, then, in that moment, you will be faced with your lawn vs. this blog, and perhaps surely God wants you to maintain it like your great aunt did, to remember her, to honor God’s creation, and so you will go do so, only, really you should have, that time coming up in seventeen days, chosen to tend to this blog and not your lawn. Now, had you read your Bible, you would have known that. Well, assuming your body lived enough centuries to have read that WHOLE Bible.

The Bible tells us that its purpose is not to save, not to show us how to live, but to show us how we cannot live, and, to show us to the One Who is Love, Who alone has the solution to our unique problem.

What did, does, will, God either want man to know, or, gift to/into man’s life that man may find his way to, to….to… well to whatever it is we think *it* is which is valuable to man? I have my own set of key points I shake my fist at God for failing to provide to me. And I can imagine that, if we add up all the “Lists Of Points” comprised by the sum of every-person and then add in all the what-ifs which occur with each person from year Zero till now on, say, Monday between 3:17 pm and 3:18 pm, and then repeat all of the mathematics for every person since year Zero in every minute of every hour of every day, and if we allow about, say, 100 words per scenario, per choice ever faced by every person, and note that each and every person is entirely unique in his or her Context given an infinite variety of variables comprised of nature, nurture, environment, digestion, biochemistry, and mood, and, then, if we sum up all the possible permutations and combinations, not just in isolation but in combination with all of one’s neighbors which we bounce off of and their own unique set of nature, nurture, environment, digestion, biochemistry, and mood, and then add in all the thoughts which race through our minds in those moments of choice and how those effect the net sum, then we really do find our trillion page book if we mean to “Give Man the Right-Answer for every Choice/Option he will ever face”.

“Well, we don’t need all THAT. Just the main points.” But there’s the rub. What if there is only one main point? Two? Three? And whose list do we go by? Mine? Yours? Gods? If we insist on this: “The Right Answer for every choice which every man will ever face till the end of the world” we must end with our trillion page book necessarily. When I think about that I suppose I am being a bit selfish to shake my fist at God for leaving my own particular list out. Having said all that, I still want my list addressed. I think if we are honest, we all have our lists.

Trillion page book? Some may just jump ship and advocate the Artificial Programming of Humanity instead of Person and Mind, Personhood and Being, or, they’ll advocate that if God is so stubborn as to not just Program everybody, then perhaps He can just use His omnipotence to provide for our trillion page books. But, since reality hits us in the face with Personhood and Person, Being and Mind, and not Robots, and, since we have not yet found any basis for a trillion page book being *necessary*, we’ll leave those self-styled assertions aside. As for the goodness of science, philosophy, and His Writing in other real things, such as People, Nature, and pretty much all of His Creation, more later.

Man “has already failed”. Past tense. This book-thing we are fussing about is not about, “Oh! I have to give man just every last shred of just every possible scenario to the Nth degree which just every person in every city on every continent will ever encounter so that they can make the right choice every time!” That’s worded silly on purpose to draw attention to “our goal” and to “His goal”. His goal is to give to man Himself, to bring man to Himself, to gift man with Himself. He loves. Our goal is that God ought to give us enough Information so that we can figure out all things and get along just fine. Perhaps without Him.

And there is point of all things: Information vs. Person. He values Person. He gives Person as both the means and the end. We value Knowledge and request Knowledge as both the means and the end.

It is Eden all over again. Radically different approaches to reality.

Person is Good-Thing. Information is a Good-Thing. Only, it is Person where Life is found. A child without any information, yet joined to its parent, is safe and has hope. A child with all the information in the world yet isolated from, dissected off of, its parent is hopeless.

The child’s inherent need of other is the *thing* which the Parent must address. Well, that is the First-Thing. Knowledge, being Good, is to follow. But, first, it must be a dive into Person.

It is Eden all over again.

The Bible has a bit to do with Moral Principles at least in some respects, but it has other purposes too. Such as: what is the solution to Innocence/Guilt and wrong choices (past tense)? Is it knowing more, and more, and more, and still more Moral Scenarios in yet more Subtly Described Situations all to the Nth degree for all individual decisions that all individual persons will ever have to make, and all compressed into a book of what would necessarily be a book of a trillion pages? Well, no, that is not going to help us fix the problem of our dissection out of Life Himself and into the Isolated-Self. We stand isolated in “I” and we need “I-You”. Not more I.

It is not that we are “going to fail”. It is that we “already failed”. Or, our nose is *already broken* and what is needed is not a Book on Surgical Principles of Anatomy but the Physician Himself. This is where, not Information, but Person comes into the picture and this shows our silly approach to reality. Our appendix has burst and we want a book rather than a Physician. God could artificially program some robots, “the Created Self”, to always choose Uncreated-Other and thus avoid the appendix rupture all together, but, that brings in a whole world of problems which make null and void the Best Things and the Best World which God defines as His Own Image: Person and Mind, Personhood and Being. Love.

Information is merely a servant to Person, and in the case of the Bible, it is (in part) information given to let us know that our nose is *already broken”. It only takes a few clear examples, perhaps a few pages, maybe ten pages at most, to draw our attention to our own interior failures in the Love of Other (People) and in the Love of Other (God). A short book will suffice. Broken nose. Physician. Perhaps ten pages? Twenty? Well, He gave us a thousand.

We stomp our feet and cry for more Information and still yet more Moral Scenarios all drawn out to the Nth degree, but He ignores our pleas because He knows we’ve *already got* a broken nose and so five more, or ten more, or a million more “examples” of how not to break one’s nose is just of *no* use whatsoever. We’ve *already broken* our nose. How to avoid breaking noses is of no further use to us. Even a book on the anatomical and surgical nuances of how to fix a broken nose is of no use to us, for books just don’t operate on noses. Persons do.

It always comes back to Person and Mind, Personhood and Being. Always. So, very simply, the Great Physician comes and Love is Manifest, and His Hands, full of blood, do what no Book on Surgery full of pages and pictures could *ever* do. Surgical textbooks just can’t fix broken noses; in fact they do not do anything at all. They just sit there. Surgeons fix broken noses. We will not find our cure in a book. Books don’t write themselves: Persons write them. And, Books don’t operate on broken noses: Person-s “do” and Person “does”. It always comes back to Person and Mind, Personhood and Being. Always.

The nose-bloodied and pain-filled patient sits in the Physician’s lobby reading the Surgeon’s Manual of “Applied Anatomy in Surgical Techniques” and, though he reads it endlessly, his nose still pours out blood, still rips with pain: it is still broken. The wait in the lobby seems endless. What’s taking the Doctor so long? He seems to linger too long behind those double-doors but we cannot see His ongoing work behind those doors nor that He desires that everyone come to His office. But they stay at home just reading about surgery……. Pontificating….. Maybe another book will do the trick……. Maybe if there were more pages….. Maybe if there were more pictures…. Finally the many thousand-paged Surgical Manual is set down and the patient is brought to a Physician and the bloodletting begins. The Great Physician bloodies His hands and Person Comes, Person is Given, Person Gives that we may have our broken anatomy reconnected. There inside that operating room there are no books and no pictures as the age of Books has passed, school has long since ended and the time for Blood, for Surgery, has come. Inside that operating room, behind those doors we find no more books, no more lessons, no more diagrams, but only the Physician and the Patient, only the I and the You, and there inside of that I-You, inside and among that Singular-We that just is Physician-Patient the real work, the work that matters, is done. It’s a bloody, painful mess. At least at first.

“Why on earth is the Christian telling me to read science too? How absurd!” Well, simply put, the Christian says these things because God writes so many sorts of Books. There are lots of books out there which He has given to us. A child. This widow. That prisoner. An orphan. My neighbor. People. People…. People………now those are quite revealing books regarding my own failure to Love-Other. My nose is broken and in my Neighbor I read this, discover this, know this. I hate. I lust. I envy. I want. I push. I take. I become aware of lots of things through that book that is my Neighbor. There are other books too. The Cosmos. Biology. Physics. Mathematics. Joy. Pain. Mind. Neuroscience. That thief. This prostitute. Me. My own soul. People shake their fist and shout, “He should have made the Bible enough” and therein insist on that silly trillion page book on “Applied Anatomy in Surgical Techniques” which can never fix even one broken nose. Books on surgery just do not, cannot “do that”. Surgeons, or Persons, can, and do, “do that”. Books do not write Persons (programming) but Persons write Books. It always comes back to Person and Mind, to Personhood and Being. Always. They’re the Ever-Present, Always-Current, and Immutable Bedrock of Every-Thing.

There is something much darker here: that fist-shaking insisting on that trillion page book misses the most important book of all and reveals a distorted sort of logic in our sense of “Know” for it misses, fails to address, ignores, even disdains as un-valuable the most precious book of all, called Person. Self. Other. That child. That orphan. This prisoner. This whore. That thief. Our wife. Our husband. The selfish prick that is me. And especially the Great Physician Himself, the Uncreated Who just is love. All these things envelope us and surround us and it is a Good Thing to dive into any or all of these as each of those things, in addition to Nature, is a Part of a larger Whole (God) and because the Whole (God) is Good, the parts (His Works) are also Good and that is why we are encouraged to explore both People and Science and, well, everything. Some people scoff at the notion that a Christian would encourage us to dive into any and all of these (Science, People, Etc), as if that silly trillion page book should have been written. “I can’t believe they tell us to dive into other Real-Things too! So they ADMIT the Bible is not enough! Well, it should have been enough!” But of course “enough” is just God Himself, and not Nature and not even the Bible. It is Person, not Information. Further, the Christian knows two additional things: first that *no book* on surgical anatomy can fix a broken nose *no matter* how many examples of how to avoid breaking one’s nose are in it, and no matter how many examples of how to fix a broken nose are in it, and no matter how many times one reads it, and, also, all those other books of God’s Works are just more windows within the same room. God has given all those windows, all those People, all those Persons, all those truths which Mind ferrets out, all those books, to us. God tells us all of creation is His and He has written with His Hand in all of it.

God writes all sorts of books. It is only the Christian who asserts that All Truth, wherever it is found, is precious and good, lovely and helpful.

Meanwhile the Agnostic and the Atheist feel the need to artificially dissect Reality into fake-compartments and scream at the Christian for refusing to join in with them. “How dare they tell us to look at science too!” Or, “How dare they encourage everyone to look into Philosophy too!” Or, “How dare they encourage people to embrace Truth wherever they find it!” “Gosh darn it the Bible should just be enough if God wants to talk to us!” As if a God of the sort we speak of is just incapable of writing with His Finger on, well, anything He pleases. They invoke “omnipotence” to assert the Artificial Programming of Humanity/Personhood and they invoke “omnipotence” to assert their silly trillion page books, but, they scream that omnipotence must be blocked (magically) from writing with His Own Finger upon and within His Own creations, which includes People. Somehow omnipotence just “cannot do that”.

They treat Information as both the means and the end, whereas, the God Who Is-Love treats Person and Mind, Personhood and Being as the means and the end. It is Eden all over again. God is Love, and, Love is just this: the “I”, the “You”, and the “I-You” or the Singular-We. Love’s Triune of I-You-We just is the means and just is the end in God’s economy. He’s not going to slaughter it for artificial programming, and all the books in the world on anatomical surgical principles can never, by themselves, void of Person, void of Physician, fix a broken nose.

Of all the books God writes, God has a Favorite Book, only, it’s not the Bible. God tells us the OT is given as a Taskmaster to Frustrate man and reveal, not how we are to live, but how we cannot live, and God tells us the NT and our current knowledge and all our Prophecy comprise something that is as of now Incomplete, as the Total is yet to come. Jesus gives to us the Highest Example of the Highest Book, for He Himself also writes a Book, and it is His most favorite Book. He calls His most favorite book the Book of Life. And what do you suppose we would find in His most favorite Book? Diagrams? No. Pictures? No. The inane Trillion Page book of Ought? No. No, none of that is found in His most Favorite Book. In His Most Favorite Book we find what Love Himself delights in Most, for He writes a Book of Love, as He just is Love. In His Most Favorite Book we find only Names, Names, Names, Names, Names, Names, and more Names, and yet more Names, and even more Names. It is Person, and Person, and Person, and Person, and still more Person-s, and yet more Person-s and even more Person-s. It is You and it is I and it is We; it is His Beloved. It always comes back to Person and Mind, to Personhood and Being. Always. That, They, Those are the Bedrock of Every-Thing.

We could here offer that God has in fact already given to every Self an Endless Book written in what is to us Word but what is to Him Countless Words and that in the Immutable Semantics of an Eternal Language which is found in Person and Mind, in Personhood and Being, in our Neighbor and in Ourselves and in Love Himself Who just is Uncreated Love.

“All books are summed up in this: Love Love-Himself and Love One-Another.” There is a Book which is called Life, and in that Book there is but one thing: Person-s. That is the best book of all. And He’s already given it, and Himself, to us.

How did God NOT "cover" these moral issues? The questioner really meant "explain," as in, "God would have given a detailed explanation."

How are stem cells and artificial insemination "relevant"? They're not relevant to me - I'm not considering stem cell treatment, legislation, or anything about it. Neither is artificial insemination something I am considering, or would ever consider, nor do I know anyone who has considered it...

Anyway, I'm just pointing out the question relies on so many prior assumptions that it's virtually an incoherent jumble of words: 'Why didn't God explain to me in unambiguous detail the appropriate response to the unique moral challenges I face today at the time the Bible was written 2000 years ago? Didn't He know what I would have to deal with?'

Um...because God is not going to give you written instructions explaining what you're supposed to think, and say, and do throughout every varying circumstance of your entire life. The Bible is written for the glory of God through humanity's salvation, not to appease your moral timidity or intellectual curiosity. It tells what humanity needs to know about our relationship with God, not what we'd like to have handed to us on a silver platter about moral dilemmas we're confronted with on a moment by moment basis.


I'm sorry to say I'm unimpressed by your response. Allow me to explain why.

First you suggest that God should have addressed modern concerns in a certain way with Biblical authors. God should have overridden the cultural sensibilities of his human instruments and have them write what would necessarily be a Trillion page Book of Ought (as described in my previous post).

The problem with this response is that it's a complete mystery (to me at least) why God should value the cultural sensibilities of Every Decision which Every Person in Every Minute of Every Year will ever face (as described in my previous post) more than delivering clear and unambiguous teachings on Man’s failure to love other (people) and on Man’s failure to love other (God) and on Man’s inability to live, and on a Physician who can fix his broken nose (as described in my previous post). It sure seems to me like the latter is much more important! In fact, I don't see any reason whatsoever for God to refrain from informing his Biblical authors about matters of Man’s broken nose and of the location of his Physician.

Your second response to the challenge essentially denies that God should be interested in giving us instructions on our own interior failures, because, according to you, the instructions given are quite useless. Or at least, they're supposedly useless, and, science and philosophy are also useless for God just cannot, does not, and will not, ever Write with His Own Finger within and upon His Own Creation. Yet you provide no logical justification for this blind assertion and you give us no reasons to believe that God either cannot or does not, or will not, ever, do so.

I see a couple of problems with this approach, too. On one hand, I disagree that the Bible, science and philosophy combined have given us sufficient instructions for every single moral issue and you seem to say that Christians say they do. They do not. They say “God” is the “enough” and all else are merely pointers toward Him. You totally mischaracterize the Christian faith by misplacing the word “enough”. Take your concern about human cloning for instance. Here you feel that, though we have a broken nose, more Knowledge with more examples on how to avoid breaking one’s nose may help us fix an already broken nose. Clearly this assertion of yours is not only illogical, but, also, you just assert it and you don’t give us any reasons to believe you.

And on the other hand, you seem to acknowledge that even if the Bible is enough when used with science and philosophy (which the Christian denies for the Christian uses the word “enough” to mean “God” and not more examples on how to avoid breaking one’s nose, as one’s nose is *already broken*) nevertheless we still need, in your view, science and philosophy in order to get by. Now, this notion of “get by” you never define and seem to think it means “without God”, but this is clearly not what the Christian means. In other words, you seem to acknowledge that the Bible isn't enough all by itself, only, the Christian agrees with you, yet you criticize the Christian for “disagreeing” with you. We still need, according to you, your favorite philosophical and/or scientific arguments to get man beyond Biblical instructions and into your requested Trillion page Book of Ought and thus settling certain modern-day moral questions, which is clearly (per my last post) not only an absurd assertion but one which you just assert and one which you don’t give us any reasons to believe is *necessary*. We see this all too clearly when you present such an argument as you do here. So your response does not solve the challenge; you still need to explain why God should just give us your Trillion Page Book of Ought when Christianity clearly states that such is not necessary as there is but One Main Need, and that is more than fully addressed in Scripture.

Our One Main Need is the All-Context, He Who just is the End of all of our little Ad Infinitums. In touching Him, we will touch All, and, in touching All, all parts of our reality begin to come into focus as all our little ad infinitums land on He Who is the Always-Present and Ever-Current, the I-AM. If we misdiagnose the disease we will forever prescribe erroneous treatments. It is a certain and unique lack of Man-In-God, God-In-Man, which is the current problem, the only problem, and that problem is fully addressed in Scripture where we see that Amalgamation beginning to take shape as Word’s immutable semantics begin to become Flesh within Love’s eternal language all of which just is a reflection of His Image.

The comments to this entry are closed.