Comments on: Perplexing revisit http://www.dansanders.net/2009/04/30/perplexing-revisit/ building a bias for action Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:31:26 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: dan http://www.dansanders.net/2009/04/30/perplexing-revisit/comment-page-1/#comment-14817 dan Fri, 01 May 2009 15:50:10 +0000 http://www.dansanders.net/?p=107#comment-14817 I agree that you haven't failed, but that is under the paradigm of an exegesis, not the system as written. The point can obviously be made that one can *only* operate under an interpretation, but that serves only to illustrate the weakness of the underlying system as it is used. I think that once the subset grows a larger voice, and can say with conviction that the text is indeed historical, and perhaps even "inspired" (if one needs that), but not immutable - and definitely not perfect - then progress can really take place, and the picture of Jesus can stand as a model without being used as a weapon, either against nonbelievers or in the ongoing Christian internecine holier-than-thou war. I agree that you haven’t failed, but that is under the paradigm of an exegesis, not the system as written. The point can obviously be made that one can *only* operate under an interpretation, but that serves only to illustrate the weakness of the underlying system as it is used.

I think that once the subset grows a larger voice, and can say with conviction that the text is indeed historical, and perhaps even “inspired” (if one needs that), but not immutable – and definitely not perfect – then progress can really take place, and the picture of Jesus can stand as a model without being used as a weapon, either against nonbelievers or in the ongoing Christian internecine holier-than-thou war.

]]> By: Scott http://www.dansanders.net/2009/04/30/perplexing-revisit/comment-page-1/#comment-14816 Scott Fri, 01 May 2009 15:12:25 +0000 http://www.dansanders.net/?p=107#comment-14816 I hear what you are saying and agree with you to a very large extent. However, what I think you are describing is evangelical Christianity. Granted, that is the vast majority and the broader implications of their theology collapse under any academic rigor or objective analysis. I deviate from you on what it means to be human but that is largely a non-starter. Ultimately, I believe that there is a subset of Christianity that looks at Jesus as a tremendous moral example, a picture of that "ought to" you describe. However, I no longer feel like I have failed whenever I feel that I have done differently than what Jesus would have done. I have largely abandoned the evangelical concept of "sin" for a more humanistic approach. Obviously, this makes me an outlier in the discussion but these ranks are swelling. I hear what you are saying and agree with you to a very large extent. However, what I think you are describing is evangelical Christianity. Granted, that is the vast majority and the broader implications of their theology collapse under any academic rigor or objective analysis.
I deviate from you on what it means to be human but that is largely a non-starter.
Ultimately, I believe that there is a subset of Christianity that looks at Jesus as a tremendous moral example, a picture of that “ought to” you describe.
However, I no longer feel like I have failed whenever I feel that I have done differently than what Jesus would have done. I have largely abandoned the evangelical concept of “sin” for a more humanistic approach. Obviously, this makes me an outlier in the discussion but these ranks are swelling.

]]>