Kay

The Greek word "pistis" is a noun. It is usually translated as faith, something that is had. The Greek word "pisteuo" is a verb, and is usually translated as believe. Another way to translate believe would be "to have faith in." It is an action. The Greek word "gnosis" is a noun. It is usually translated as knowledge, something that is had. The Greek word "Epiginosko" is a verb, and is usally translated as to know, to recognize, to perceive or to ascertain. It is an action. Faith and belief are relatively interchangeable terms. Knowledge is a seperate term and pretty much stands alone. I'm not big on using the term "belief" when a more appropriate word would be "know," or vice versa.

The Shaking of the Foundations by Paul Tillich

That reminds me of the qualified non-dualism of Ramanuja. Cool stuff.

You ain't ever had church potluck until you've had Mormon (LDS) pot luck. Green jello with pineapple, five different kinds of "ambrosia" (google it) and ham sandwiches on Rhodes bake and serve white rolls with mayonaise. Yummy. (Yes, I was being sarcastic.)

That's a very good point about being the yeast (or new wine).

Are you saying that some of Jesus' words (as attributed to him in the gospels) contradict each other? If so, I don't necessarily disagree. I just choose to look at the contradiction and see if there is some paradoxical truth or tension going on (that might be considered contradiction at first glance). I don't think Jesus would have considered your frustration to be petty or sinful. Jesus got angry and frustrated at injustice and hypocrisy. Much of the "meek and mild" Jesus, imo, is our cultural bias being read into an Ancient Near East text. Plus I think many of Jesus sayings have been misuderstood. For example, the "turn the other cheek" situation. Have you ever read Tony Campolo's take on that? Very interesting. And I agree. Like I said, I'm not an inerrantist. But what I don't do is look at the Gospels and say "Well, we think this has been added later (a redaction), and so has this, so lets 'take these out.' Plus this is a miracle, so we'll ignore this part too." I don't discard any of it. I look for the truth in it. That's all I meant.

You are very welcome.

www.amazon.com - McChurched

Here comes Kay with another serendipitous comment ... Over the past few days I've been doing research into post-liberalism and neo-orthodoxy, which of course brings up "propositional theology" versus "narrative theology." Interesting stuff, with which I was relatively unfamiliar, but now I'm running into it all over the place. Yes, there are propositional truths found in scripture, but there aren't as many as certain Christians think. Scripture is narrative that moves (hopefully) one to a relationship with the Divine; that allows insight into deep truths about the universe and mankind; and that gives hope for and motivation for the future. .

Actually I was not. Weird eh? This is somewhat I had in mind. There is/was a rabbinical teaching method of "binding and loosing," ( and of "abolishing and fulfilling"). All these teachings (whatever the Rabbi bound or loosed as far as the Law goes) made up the teacher's "yoke." Jesus said his yoke was easy and light, and that the truth of it would set you free. Although Jesus' teachings were not unique (in that they are found in the OT), they were uniquely presented. What he presented, and how he presented them had a ring of authority that many pharasees did not like. He called himself God's son. He forgave sins. And not only did he let loose certain laws ("You have heard it said ... but I tell you), but he gave his disciples the authority to do so (the keys to the kingdom).

An interesting perspective emerges when you delve into what Jesus meant by "You have heard it say, but I tell you ..." And also what the words "abolish" and "fulfill" would have meant to Jesus a(nd to the Jews he was talking to). It's quite a bit different than what western, modern brains tend to interpret it as. Peter's dream (vision) of the unclean foods, on a blanket, descending from Heaven ... quite an interesting progression of events unfold after Jesus death, as to whether or not the Law must be observed by Gentile converts ...

I didn't think Jesus was referring to the "New Testament" but to the Law and the Prophets. It's unfortunate that nowdays the terms "scripture" and "bible" and "God's word" are used interchangeably. I do it myself and kick myself when I do it. That's something that Rob Bell (my current favorite Christian thinker) makes a big deal about in his book "Velvet Elvis." That scripture is open-ended and that it's meant to be interpreted, discussed, debated and delved into IN A GROUP. I do look at the Bible as being a bit more inspired and inspirational than those things, but I don't rule out finding truth in those things either. Yup. Me too.

That's quite true. Others that are interested in pluralism (John Hick comes to mind) are very much against the philosophies that make a tradition unique. For example, Hick is anti-trinitarian. He misses the point, I think.

Huston Smith is in a category all his own. I've read The World's Religions, a book that discusses the major world religions. It's very good if you want a well rounded view of what different people believe. I'd consider it the must have primer on the topic. I've read The Soul of Christianity. In it Smith unpacks his view of Christianity, which, unless you're somewhat familiar with the perennial philosophy, can be confusing. I really enjoyed it however. Smith is easy to read. I've read Why Religion Matters. It's a bit of a polemic against what Smith calls "scientism," the blind faith that some put in science while condeming religion. It's been my least favorite so far, but still a good book. You might enjoy the interview (streaming video) with Smith on the Meaning of Life TV (website) before deciding to buy any of his books. It's a great site with many interesting interviews. Here is his homepage, it lists everything available from him. Smith would be considered a pluralist (or perhaps a universalist), so although he's Christian, you'll find other sources (Hindu, Buddhist) in his writings to explain his philosophy.

I'm not an inerrantist, but I do choose to look at the words of Jesus in the Gospels as what Jesus actually said. There isn't anything that is attributed to him that I don't find amazing (and is actually why I'm Chrisitian).