Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site l5.uucp
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!sun!l5!laura
From: laura@l5.uucp (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: A/Theology Vs. The Canon of Scripture
Message-ID: <222@l5.uucp>
Date: Sun, 27-Oct-85 14:44:30 EST
Article-I.D.: l5.222
Posted: Sun Oct 27 14:44:30 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 31-Oct-85 08:29:17 EST
References: <1203@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> <1925@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: laura@l5.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 66

In article <1925@umcp-cs.UUCP> mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) writes:
>
>I also object to the notion that we can sit back now and come up with an
>objective evaluation of 2nd and 3rd century theological controversies.
>Considering the impact of the adoptions of the various positions, it can
>hardly be argued that any of us is objective.  Deconstructionism must itself
>be considered as politically motivated, and following this road very far
>leads me at least to the conclusion that it doesn't get me anything; one
>certainly cannot find anything that can be labelled true, and indeed seems
>to argue against any truth value at all, even falsity.  The only way I can
>see that justifies deconstructionism is the presumption that Christianity,
>in any form at all, can be presumed false.  Fine.  Rather than hiding in
>clerical robes, they would do better to state their antifaith openly, and
>honestly.
>

During the first 200 years of Christianity, do you know who killed the
most Christians?  Other Christians.  Where I was growing up there was a
``convenient fiction'' that this was ``ok'' since it was part of God's
plan.  The idea is that God wouldn't let real sincere Christians get far
off the path.

It is a comforting idea, but hardly hold up to historical scrutiny.
You can find pleantly of sincere Christians who honestly believed that
God wanted them to burn heretics and witches, or who thought that Russian
communism was what God wanted, or who thought that a strong Nazi Germany
was part of God's plan.  Take a look at what happened inside Germany as
Nazi supporting church leaders discovered that there *were* concentration
camps.  (Hint: a good many of them discovered this only *after* being sent
to one.)

In the light of this, it is clear that you can't count upon the Christian
God to directly communicate ``you are making a hideous mistake'' to you
simply because you are a sincere Christian.

There is no reason to assume that the council of Trent had any better luck
avoiding mistakes.

Given all this, it seems strange to practice Christianity because you think
that this is part of God's plan -- in some sense you can believe that 
everything is part of God's plan, but in that case you are part of it whether
or not you are a Christian -- since you know that whatever you perceive as
God's plan could be very far off the mark.  YOu are left with adopting
Christianity for the effect that it has in your life, or because you think
that its percepts match that which you consider moral by your own standards
of morality (which could come from God, of course, but don't come from God
in the same way that someone who does things simply because the Bible says
so, means ``they come from God'').  In this case, I'll bet a careful scrutiny
of the Old Testament makes you squirm...

You are left with a very eclectic form of Christianity, which is more
concerned with USEFULNESS than with TRUTH, since the more you look at it,
the more impossible it seems to actualy know that you have truth even if
you had it.

But be careful.  Follow this too far and you will end up dropping the
Christianity, and ending up simply eclectic, like me...

-- 
Help beutify the world. I am writing a book called *How To Write Portable C
Programs*.  Send me anything that you would like to find in such a book when
it appears in your bookstores. Get your name mentioned in the credits. 

Laura Creighton		
sun!l5!laura		(that is ell-five, not fifteen)
l5!laura@lll-crg.arpa