Relativism VS. Absoulte

[Blackheart]

Odd that people can argue different views amd applications of an absolute truth...

BoP, you may enter the bathroom, but I doubt the tentacle monster left any T.P.

[Starr Polish]

Originally posted by Arathorn
I enjoy testing my faith and finding out that there are more ways to view the absolute power I worship than what the higher-up religious orders say. As I see it, one can never truly understand the absolute or anyone absolute. The religious leaders are also human and as prone to relatives or imperfections as I am. However, just because I cannot fully understand something does not mean I have to disbelieve. BTW, I choose to believe.

I am a guarded religious at best right now and an agnostic at worst.

Well said, Arathorn. I have hit nearly every base within the Christian religion, from near fanatic, luke-warm worshipper, skeptic, and agnostic. (I'm not including things like denominations and status positions, like priest, blah blah). My possibly former church pushed me to nearly give up on Christianity and become an all out atheist or convert to Wicca.

Right now I would say that I am a guarded religious, and I fully believe in the Law of Liberty (Romans 14).

[Andúril]

Yay! Romans 14! Yippee yay!

First things first, Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

So, if you eat only herbs, then you are weak. But what does Genesis 1:29 have to say about this? And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So, God tells us that out of all the seemingly edible things that he has created (plants and animals), our food should consist of plants. And if we are restricted to eating plants, then we are restricted, according to Romans 14:2, to being weak.

But then we have Leviticus 11:2 `Speak unto the sons of Israel, saying, This is the beast which ye do eat out of all the beasts which are on the earth:

So now we can eat meat? So now, we are allowed to be strong (Romans 14:2), by choosing to eat both meat and plants? That's not what God wanted in Genesis 1:29.

This food issue is a problem for the Bible. Consider Leviticus 11:3-8 any dividing a hoof, and cleaving the cleft of the hoofs, bringing up the cud, among the beasts, it ye do eat. `Only, this ye do not eat -- of those bringing up the cud, and of those dividing the hoof -- the camel, though it is bringing up the cud, yet the hoof not dividing -- it is unclean to you; and the rabbit, though it is bringing up the cud, yet the hoof it divideth not -- unclean it is to you; and the hare, though it is bringing up the cud, yet the hoof hath not divided -- unclean it is to you; and the sow, though it is dividing the hoof, and cleaving the cleft of the hoof, yet the cud it bringeth not up -- unclean it is to you. `Of their flesh ye do not eat, and against their carcase ye do not come -- unclean they are to you.

So, according to this passage, we are allowed to eat certain animals. The same is mentioned in Deuteronomy 14:7-8 Nevertheless, these shall ye not eat, of them that chew the cud or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel and the hare, and the coney; for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore, they are unclean unto you. And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass.

Now, if we are allowed to eat certain animals, why was this not mentioned in Genesis 1:29? That verse in Genesis, as well as verse 30, say that plants and herbs were to be eaten by Man and all beasts of the earth, all birds (that fly(?)), and "every creeping thing on the earth" that breathes.

So let's recap. We are allowed to eat certain animals, as well as plants. Let's go back to Romans 14:2. It says that one who is strong believes that he/she may eat all things. All things includes the camel, hare, coney and swine. It also includes faeces, glass, hydrochloric acid, plastic, and dangerous poisons. What have we thus learnt? That if we eat things that we are forbidden to eat (i.e. camel), then we are strong.

Are there any other verses in the bible that contradict those Leviticus and Deuteronomy accounts? Yes.

Genesis 9:3 Every creeping thing that is alive, to you it is for food; as the green herb I have given to you the whole;

"Every creeping thing" includes coney. Oh, and by the way, verse 4 goes on to say "its blood -- ye do not eat", which means that we are forbidden from being strong, because blood is part of the set of "all things".

Then there is Acts 10:9-13 Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

Although this doesn't contradict the Leviticus and Deuteronomy passages, but it doesn't fit in too nicely with Genesis 1:29.

[Andúril]

And ofcourse there is Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Really? According to Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the camels, rabbits and pigs are unclean. And not because ordinary men decided, because God decided.

And lastly, there is 1 Timothy 4:1-4 And the Spirit expressly speaketh, that in latter times shall certain fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and teachings of demons, in hypocrisy speaking lies, being seared in their own conscience, forbidding to marry -- to abstain from meats that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those believing and acknowledging the truth, because every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, with thanksgiving being received,

Interesting. Clearly, God is talking about not all meat, only the meat that God intended to be eaten (which is actually, according to Genesis 9:3, all meat...). Apparently every creature of God is good (except that some are unclean....ooops) and nothing is to be rejected (except camels, rabbits, pigs, etc). Also, those who don't eat meat are not only weak (Romans 14:2), but they have fallen away from the faith.

So watch out, you God-fearing vegetarians and vegans!

By the way, do rabbits even chew cud?

Well, that wraps up......the food issue. But there's other interesting tidbits to be found in Romans chapter 14.

Like verse 5 One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Hmmm. Anyone remember the sabbath? Romans says that one man can honour the sabbath above other days, but if someone else honours all days the same (which would make the sabbath just any old day), then it's okay.

Here are some other interesting passages that refer to the sabbath:

Exodus 20:8 Remember the Sabbath-day to sanctify it;

Exodus 31:14-15 and ye have kept the sabbath, for it is holy to you, he who is polluting it is certainly put to death -- for any who doeth work in it -- that person hath even been cut off from the midst of his people. Six days is work done, and in the seventh day is a sabbath of holy rest to Jehovah; any who doeth work in the sabbath-day is certainly put to death,

Exodus 35:2 Six days is work done, and on the seventh day there is to you a holy day, a sabbath of rest to Jehovah; any who doeth work in it is put to death;

Deuteronomy 5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.

Numbers 15:32, 36 And they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day....And all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.

Isaiah 56:2 O the happiness of a man who doth this, And of a son of man who keepeth hold on it, Keeping the sabbath from polluting it, And keeping his hand from doing any evil.

It seems like God was pretty serious about the Sabbath being honoured and sanctified over all other days of week. So much for Romans 14:5...

[Blackheart]

Andie.

What the hell does that have to do with the price of absolutism in China?

[Andúril]

Blackie. Hey, your name reminds me of the bad guy in one of the Care Bears movies.....err....

I realize that my posts here have pretty much absoultely nothing to do with absoultism, but lately I have developed a need for shooting down any claims related to theology that I am able to.

And it just so happens that this thread is my outlet. I will, however, try to refrain myself from my critical outbursts.

[Masderanoe]

what?

[The Lady of Ithilien]

Odd that people can argue different views amd applications of an absolute truth...

To paraphrase the Tao-te Ching (I forget which chapter), it wouldn't be the absolute truth if they didn't. It's sort of like many facets on a single diamond, sparkling in many different colors but unable to comprehend, let alone understand, the actual nature of the light they reflect. Or as Rána Eressëa said so well (see above for full quote):

How I see it: belief in some sort of absolute power and structure is ...factual knowledge. Did that make sense?

Yes, both the statement and the question, which is an ongoing one for us all.

[Blackheart]

If it has more than one mode of application, it's not absolute.

Universal laws aren't even absolute, they are relative to the mode of application, relative to the matrix they are being applied to.

Only metaphysical constructs that never interact with empirical "reality" can be absolute.

[Wayfarer]

Oh, confound and bother you all.

I very nearly didn't bother checking entmoot today, because i knew I'd end up withywindling myself back to this thread.

But, here I am. So hold on to your hats...

Reviewing Anduril's posts, in reverse chronological order...

The whole food issue:

To requote romans 14:4 'Nothing is uncleen in itself' Or (one could say) 'nothing is absolutely unclean'.

'But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean'

Appearently, cleanliness or uncleanliness is...relative. I must say I'm rather dissapointed in you, because in two places you quoted verses which verify this: do not eat...the camel...it is unclean to you. and the rabbit...unclean it is to you and so on and so forth-and yet you persist in pressing the point.

But hey, you have a laugh on me... I'm now arguing the relativistic aspects of christianity. Some things can be good in themselves, but become bad due to mindset.

...Um, Why exactly?

Quite possibly, because doing something you believe to be wrong can have a negative impact on you spiritually. Carrying out imagined evils degrades the ability to resist real wrongs.

But why did God give the Israelites orders on what the could or could not eat? To set them apart from the rest of the world: 'This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the Lord , who sets you apart as holy' (Exodus 31:13) It is also likely that certain commandments are health related (such as those relating to diseases.)

Christians are likewise called to set themselves apart by holy living.

Now, before you run away with this on me, nothing is unclean in itself, but everything can be used the wrong way. Food is made for eating-but when one overeats, or eats things that aren't food, or whatever, you're taking a good thing and using it the wrong way.

This is a principle which you can apply to pretty much anything.

[crickhollow]

[edit: nevermind, I do not wish to re-entangle myself]

[Andúril]

Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Enter omniscience. The knowledge of the truth value of all propositions. God, who is supposed to be omniscient, says that certain things are unclean for certain people. And if God says something, and he is not lying, then he is perfectly correct.

But what happens if those people don't think that those things are unclean. Romans 14:14 says that if someone thinks that something is unclean, then it is unclean to that person. Taken from a more detailed viewpoint, if someone thinks that something is objectively or inherently unclean, then to that person, it is unclean. The fact that an individual's opinions about something are subjective, indicates that the object held as unclean by one person is not necessarily objectively unclean, but is necessarily subjectively unlean.

One must wonder: is pork objectively, or subjectively, unclean? Is it's uncleanliness absolute, or relative? Well, for one, we know that God said it (so the Bible says), and we can make an initial conclusion, that is, the uncleanliness of pork (and those other animals) is subjective, and relative to God. Now, since God is omniscient, and therefore is always right, we should be able to say that pork is objectively or absolutely unclean? No, we can't because:

Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself...

If there is nothing that is absolutely, inherently, or objectively unclean, then what are we to think about pork, and rabbits, etc? If something is going to be unclean, then it is only going to be unclean relative to the person who has decided such. I have decided that pork is not "unclean", which means, according to Romans, that pork is not only not absolutely unclean, but it is not relatively unclean (to me) either. To me, therefore, pork is clean.

Just something to think about...

Mark 1:23 And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,

According to Romans 14:14 (as quoted above), is the man's spirit clean, or unclean? Do I get to decide?

[markedel]

The point with such laws is that they are specifically directed towards one small, select group of people for a specific purpose. What the average human being things about the issue is therefore actually irrelevant as it doesn't affect him (unless he is always dealing with religious Jews in one way or another). It's an important misconception. Jewish tradition doesn't really care what non-Jews do at all. It's spiritually irrelevant. It may sound harsh, but theologically speaking that's how it goes. God cares that you don't murder, commit gross sexual immorality, create some sort of ordered society, aren't grossly cruel to animals and acknowledge he exists. Check Noah for details.

[Starr Polish]

Just a quote from a favorite book that I want to throw in.

"Think of all the duties that were perfectly obvious to Paul or Matthew in that old Arabian desert that are pure nonsense to us now. All that foot washing, for example. Was it really for God's glory, or just to keep the sand out of the house?" - Brother or Tata Fowles in The Poisonwood Bible

[Wayfarer]

indeed, markedhel and starr polish. I am in agreement with you both.

But anduril, really...

[QUOTE]Enter omniscience. The knowledge of the truth value of all propositions. God, who is supposed to be omniscient, says that certain things are unclean for certain people. And if God says something, and he is not lying, then he is perfectly correct.

But what happens if those people don't think that those things are unclean.
[QUOTE]

What you miss is that it's impossible for anything to be absolutely evil or bad. Everything God created is good, and when it operates in the way it was made to, is still good. It is only when things are misused and corrupted that they become bad.

Like markedhel said- the jewish laws were directed to one specific group of people. the jews were given the law for a reason-to set them apart from the gentiles. And, since jews are forbidden to eat pork, then for them to eat pork would be to act in a way contrary to what God has commanded them, and so is bad.

I believe it was Macdonald that said 'There is but one good-that is God. Everything else is good when it looks to him and bad when it turns from him'. That sums it up better than anything I could say.

And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
According to Romans 14:14 (as quoted above), is the man's spirit clean

Anduril, your normally a rather sensible fellow, but things like this just throw me for a loop.

First of all, it is most likely not the man's spirit that is 'unclean', but that some spirit is tormenting him. And since that's not the way spirits are supposed to behave, is unclean.

on the other hand, if it were in fact the man that was being referred to as unclean (I can't help wondering why you quote the king james. terrible translation.) then it's pretty obvious that the man is relatively unclean, since his state is not what it is meant to be.

Random thought: I really haven't been praying for patience lately. *sigh*

[markedel]

Uncleanliness, assuming this is in the bible is likely a spiritual thing involving prohibited conduct with one thing or another...

[Starr Polish]

Yes, Brother Fowles (or rather, Barbara Kingsolver) had many a wise insight about the bible. I reccomend the book to everyone, no matter what their beliefs. Very good, yet slightly ambiguos.

[BeardofPants]

*sigh* This thread has become rather boring since it went OT into a theological debate. It's been done. And guess what? It didn't get resolved to anyones' satisfaction. You could go at it ALL year, and bore the pants off everyone in the meantime.

Unsubscribing... Will still check in from time to time, in the vain hopes that it would have become more interesting.

[Sween]

ill make it more intresting (yes i have been drinking again) what if gods ment to be so nice why is suffering is the devil really nice because he knows he evil. and is god really a half monkey half goat with an alegie to pickles?

[osszie]

Originally posted by Sween
ill make it more intresting (yes i have been drinking again) what if gods ment to be so nice why is suffering is the devil really nice because he knows he evil. and is god really a half monkey half goat with an alegie to pickles?

Sween could be suffering the biggest hangover the world has ever known tomorrow