Post by shegeek72Post by j***@go.comIn sum, my description of Christianity is, in the
"IT DOESN'T WORK!"
In which episode did he say that (I'm a big fan of the original Star
Trek)?
That's in that ridiculous episode called "Spectre of the Gun",
wherein Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, and Chekov are
transported to a (historically inaccurate) replica of
1881 Tombstone, where they play the Clanton side
of the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral (with somewhat
different results from the original). The "It doesn't work!"
line referred to a gas grenade which McCoy manufactured
from oddments found in Doc Holliday's office, but which
(due to the machinations of the aliens who had put them
in this situation) did not have the anticipated anesthetic
effect, and thus forced our guys to face the Earps.
While I'm at it, here are miscellaneous comments on
Post by shegeek72But now here is the rub: it is possible to agree with you, that the American
Church is dead but thinks it is alive, yet NOT agree that your entire attitude,
posting SO much anti-christian propaganda, is at all justified. But you persist
in whining that God doesn't love you instead of recognizing this possibility.
Well, you once wrote here that you think God doesn't love you because
He didn't help you win the lottery, your expectations of how God's love
should be demonstrated to you personally are unrealistic and extremely
selfish.
Both of these continue to refuse to understand the depth to which
I have been hurt by God (or by discovering His absence). Zach
should give the Miranda warning before his posts: "Anything you
say will be used against you!" -- he must be a Republican.
Neither seems to have the slightest bit of the alleged love of God
in them; certainly their Pharisaic lectures do not constitute any
demonstration of love. Presumably they find me as disquieting
as the Pharisees did Jesus -- and for somewhat similar reasons,
as I point up inadequacies in their religion that they don't want
to face. It is not for nothing that I have sometimes styled myself
the Apostate Prophet.
And both of them missed the point of my posting, wherein I said in
Post by shegeek72What I am beginning to
realize is that perhaps the reason for this is to destroy
all the illusions (including what seemed to be faith)
which enabled me to evade the fact that I was (am)
signally lacking in "life...more abundantly". The
trouble is, having reached this point, I don't see God
doing anything to change this, to provide me with
"life", despite His claims.
"Life...more abundantly" is, Biblically and experientially,
something entirely different from abundance of things
(such as money). It is an internal characteristic
("springs of living water" etc.). But God hasn't
done anything to make "living water" spring up in me.
He has merely allowed me to be subjected to stress
that drains what little "life" I might have. If He cared,
He'd go out of His way, move heaven and earth, to
help me in every way, internal and external;
but He does nothing. Certainly there's nothing
in Christian *doctrine* by itself which provides
meaning or "life" when it's directly contradicted
by experience. I'll repeat and amplify something
I've said before: Paul got it backwards. What he
should have said is, "If only in the next life we have
hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable"
-- and then added "But in that case, why would we
have any hope for the next life either, when God
gives us no hope in this one?"
One of Wallace Stevens's later, long poems was
called (approximately) "Notes Toward a Supreme
Fiction", i.e., thoughts on what sort of meaning
one can create for oneself once religion has
failed, and how one can believe in it even though
one knows it's "fiction"; but I don't think I can be
dishonest enough to work that way. Somehow
I need to look at grim reality and still be able to
find meaning and joy and courage (a word derived
from the French for "heart"). Christianity has,
in my experience, shown itself to be a "Supreme
Fiction", temporarily effective and at times
pleasant, but ultimately hollow.
-- Jeffrey J. Sargent