Quote:
Originally Posted by Subfallen
That seems very usable. For example, I can deduce that I don't reject God, because I have no view on what is actually being advocated in Iron Age contemplative literature like the NT. (Except in cases that are not at all unique to Iron Age contemplative literature. E.g. that aiding orphans is deeply honorable.)
As bunny points out, our interpretations will differ, therefore our idea of rejecting God may differ. A good example is going to church on Sunday. Personally I do not, nor do I feel it is necessary, but many people would disagree with me.
Ultimately it is about being truthful with yourself. As Paul points out, intention has a lot to do with it. But this does not mean that you can make up an interpretation of something to get out of doing what is right.
Quote:
I don't know if either Jibninjas or NotReady will accept it. NotReady seems to feel that one may reject God without knowing any Scripture---or even the concept 'God', for that matter. So clearly he won't be pleased.
Jibninjas, on the other hand, wants to use a correct(!) Biblical interpretation as his point of departure. So I don't know if he can handle that much subjectivity.
Hold on a second. I never said that one needs the bible necessarily. It is just necessary for conversation. God has put a moral law in the hearts of all.
Quote:
If I object to this, it's only because we perhaps disagree on the meaning of the word 'meaningless'; so w/e.
Perhaps.