<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Naturalism&#8217;s Missionary Zeal</title>
	<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/</link>
	<description>A Ministry of Shepherds' Fellowship</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 20:27:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: David M.</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127303</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127303</guid>
					<description>scary, check out a site I think you'll appreciate for its logical approach. It is

www.whyibelieve.org

I urge you to allow yourself to be wrong (in what you now believe) and allow yourslef to be corrected (by the truth). We have all been there. I'm sure many of us were not "indoctrinated" as children to fear any other view but the Bible. I myself came to believe at 28 y.o. by reading the Bible. As I grew I found the evidence bore it out. Mormons claim a 'burning in the bosom' feeling but what I felt was not that. EVIDENCE does vindicate the Bible's claim to be the very Word of God. Take care, friend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>scary, check out a site I think you&#8217;ll appreciate for its logical approach. It is</p>
<p><a href='http://www.whyibelieve.org' rel='nofollow'>www.whyibelieve.org</a></p>
<p>I urge you to allow yourself to be wrong (in what you now believe) and allow yourslef to be corrected (by the truth). We have all been there. I&#8217;m sure many of us were not &#8220;indoctrinated&#8221; as children to fear any other view but the Bible. I myself came to believe at 28 y.o. by reading the Bible. As I grew I found the evidence bore it out. Mormons claim a &#8216;burning in the bosom&#8217; feeling but what I felt was not that. EVIDENCE does vindicate the Bible&#8217;s claim to be the very Word of God. Take care, friend.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: JohnD</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127273</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127273</guid>
					<description>The Naturalistic Fallacy in ethics is well established and has never been overcome. You cannot get "ought" from "is." Thus, Naturalists must indeed borrow coded behaviors, in whatever form, and voluntarily abide by them.

But once they attempt to make an ethical pronouncement they deem should be applied to all, they fall victim to the Naturalistic Fallacy, or what's been called "The Grand Sez Who?"

They can never, ever, justify a community ethic. For all it takes is one in the community to say, "Sez who?" and clonk you on the head.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Naturalistic Fallacy in ethics is well established and has never been overcome. You cannot get &#8220;ought&#8221; from &#8220;is.&#8221; Thus, Naturalists must indeed borrow coded behaviors, in whatever form, and voluntarily abide by them.</p>
<p>But once they attempt to make an ethical pronouncement they deem should be applied to all, they fall victim to the Naturalistic Fallacy, or what&#8217;s been called &#8220;The Grand Sez Who?&#8221;</p>
<p>They can never, ever, justify a community ethic. For all it takes is one in the community to say, &#8220;Sez who?&#8221; and clonk you on the head.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127173</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 00:30:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127173</guid>
					<description>We appreciate your kind discussion, Scarysnow.

Do keep this in mind though, if we're wrong, then no harm done.  But if you're wrong about God, and you continue to reject God, then there are eternal consequences.  Don't allow yourself to sleep until you have come to grips with that reality.

Take care,
Gabriel</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We appreciate your kind discussion, Scarysnow.</p>
<p>Do keep this in mind though, if we&#8217;re wrong, then no harm done.  But if you&#8217;re wrong about God, and you continue to reject God, then there are eternal consequences.  Don&#8217;t allow yourself to sleep until you have come to grips with that reality.</p>
<p>Take care,<br />
Gabriel
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: scarysnow</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127160</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:50:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127160</guid>
					<description>Well, I think that'll have to be the last point. As with any debate, it's difficult to discuss something if we are using different definitions of the same terms. 

Plus, it's probably without point because your argument is circular.

1. The Bible is infallible.
2. If the Bible is fallible, refer to point 1. 

I mean, there's no way I can get through that cement wall, because no matter what evidence I point to, or sources I reference to, you will refer to point 1, and we'll be right back to where we started.

And that's fine, you can believe in whatever you want. Most people do. Even the faithful are divided. I'm more interested in learning to co-exist, and forming healthy relationships, regardless of faith (or lack thereof), which is why I've tried to clarify the scientific position on all this.

But again, I do appreciate the discussion. I doubt it has helped, but it has at least educated me a bit more on the fundamentalist perspective of the scientific community.

So for now, I'll end spamming up your blog with &lt;i&gt;my&lt;/i&gt; perspective, as I'm sure it's not very proactive in an environment set up for fellow believers. Thanks for indulging me, though. Take care... :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I think that&#8217;ll have to be the last point. As with any debate, it&#8217;s difficult to discuss something if we are using different definitions of the same terms. </p>
<p>Plus, it&#8217;s probably without point because your argument is circular.</p>
<p>1. The Bible is infallible.<br />
2. If the Bible is fallible, refer to point 1. </p>
<p>I mean, there&#8217;s no way I can get through that cement wall, because no matter what evidence I point to, or sources I reference to, you will refer to point 1, and we&#8217;ll be right back to where we started.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s fine, you can believe in whatever you want. Most people do. Even the faithful are divided. I&#8217;m more interested in learning to co-exist, and forming healthy relationships, regardless of faith (or lack thereof), which is why I&#8217;ve tried to clarify the scientific position on all this.</p>
<p>But again, I do appreciate the discussion. I doubt it has helped, but it has at least educated me a bit more on the fundamentalist perspective of the scientific community.</p>
<p>So for now, I&#8217;ll end spamming up your blog with <i>my</i> perspective, as I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s not very proactive in an environment set up for fellow believers. Thanks for indulging me, though. Take care&#8230; <img src='http://www.sfpulpit.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127157</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 23:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127157</guid>
					<description>Scarysnow,

Most of us who frequent this blog hold to the same method of interpretation that someone use to interpret any ancient document: Literally according to what it says, what the words mean, in light of its historical context, and according the grammar of the language.

I'm not aware of anything in Scripture that has been proved false.  Archeology continues to say certain things didn't happen or didn't exist... then they continually find evidence that proves the Bible right.

Science hasn't proved the Bible wrong on anything because it can only offer unprovable theories.

As you know the Bible hasn't changed for over 2000 years, the OT even longer.  Yet archeology and science are constantly changing, coming up with new theories, throwing out old ones, etc.  On the whole that's not necessarily a bad thing.  But a scientist cannot be dogmatic because who knows what evidence will prove him false next year.

I do believe the Bible is infallible, mainly because it says so, but also because no one has been able to prove otherwise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scarysnow,</p>
<p>Most of us who frequent this blog hold to the same method of interpretation that someone use to interpret any ancient document: Literally according to what it says, what the words mean, in light of its historical context, and according the grammar of the language.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not aware of anything in Scripture that has been proved false.  Archeology continues to say certain things didn&#8217;t happen or didn&#8217;t exist&#8230; then they continually find evidence that proves the Bible right.</p>
<p>Science hasn&#8217;t proved the Bible wrong on anything because it can only offer unprovable theories.</p>
<p>As you know the Bible hasn&#8217;t changed for over 2000 years, the OT even longer.  Yet archeology and science are constantly changing, coming up with new theories, throwing out old ones, etc.  On the whole that&#8217;s not necessarily a bad thing.  But a scientist cannot be dogmatic because who knows what evidence will prove him false next year.</p>
<p>I do believe the Bible is infallible, mainly because it says so, but also because no one has been able to prove otherwise.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: scarysnow</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127145</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 22:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127145</guid>
					<description>re: Gabriel.

I posted something earlier, but the blog administrators didn't approve it (oddly) to loosely answer your question on relevant scripture. Sorry!

But yes, I agree! Evidence should be scrutinized, and retested and retested, and shown to support hypothesis. That's why I'm such a big fan of the scientific principles and methods. This objective scrutiny is effective. They want to prove themselves wrong, and the stronger theories and hypothesis that can withstand these trials are what we might call "working theories." 

Do you know many believers who place the similar scrutiny on their own scriptural documents, or faith-based ideas? I don't. Instead, they assume the Bible is 100% accurate, and anything that contradicts it is wrong. That's called dogma. Even how illogical their claims might be.

I don't know your personal approach, because as I've pointed out, many faiths are different, even those who have the same books. So I don't want to say you fall under this category. But most believers I know either consider scripture infallible, or simply just gel it to meet their own personal bias or necessities. So what's the point of having a moral foundation if everyone's version of it is different anyway? Isn't the Golden Rule good enough?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re: Gabriel.</p>
<p>I posted something earlier, but the blog administrators didn&#8217;t approve it (oddly) to loosely answer your question on relevant scripture. Sorry!</p>
<p>But yes, I agree! Evidence should be scrutinized, and retested and retested, and shown to support hypothesis. That&#8217;s why I&#8217;m such a big fan of the scientific principles and methods. This objective scrutiny is effective. They want to prove themselves wrong, and the stronger theories and hypothesis that can withstand these trials are what we might call &#8220;working theories.&#8221; </p>
<p>Do you know many believers who place the similar scrutiny on their own scriptural documents, or faith-based ideas? I don&#8217;t. Instead, they assume the Bible is 100% accurate, and anything that contradicts it is wrong. That&#8217;s called dogma. Even how illogical their claims might be.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know your personal approach, because as I&#8217;ve pointed out, many faiths are different, even those who have the same books. So I don&#8217;t want to say you fall under this category. But most believers I know either consider scripture infallible, or simply just gel it to meet their own personal bias or necessities. So what&#8217;s the point of having a moral foundation if everyone&#8217;s version of it is different anyway? Isn&#8217;t the Golden Rule good enough?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: David M.</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127135</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 21:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127135</guid>
					<description>Gabriel, he's probably referring the the "corners of the earth"...(Isaiah 11:12, Rev 7:1) a saying we still use!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gabriel, he&#8217;s probably referring the the &#8220;corners of the earth&#8221;&#8230;(Isaiah 11:12, Rev 7:1) a saying we still use!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: David M.</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127133</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 21:11:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127133</guid>
					<description>Scary, there's no such thing as an "ex-Christian". 1 John 2:19. You can't be born again and then be unborn. I know the guy who did "The God who Wasn't There" maintains this but he doesn't know what he's talking about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scary, there&#8217;s no such thing as an &#8220;ex-Christian&#8221;. 1 John 2:19. You can&#8217;t be born again and then be unborn. I know the guy who did &#8220;The God who Wasn&#8217;t There&#8221; maintains this but he doesn&#8217;t know what he&#8217;s talking about.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127124</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 20:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127124</guid>
					<description>Scarysnow,

You've made some pretty bold statements... You have yet to answer my question about morals found in Scripture that are no longer valid.  In the previous post you stated that the Bible says the earth is flat and the moon generates its own light.  Where is that?

Also, just because humans can't agree with what the Bible says, that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the Bible.  That simply points to our defficiency.  Just like when scientists can't agree on the meaning of evidence.  The evidence is what it is, so is the Bible.  We just need to be constantly striving to find the truth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scarysnow,</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve made some pretty bold statements&#8230; You have yet to answer my question about morals found in Scripture that are no longer valid.  In the previous post you stated that the Bible says the earth is flat and the moon generates its own light.  Where is that?</p>
<p>Also, just because humans can&#8217;t agree with what the Bible says, that doesn&#8217;t mean there is anything wrong with the Bible.  That simply points to our defficiency.  Just like when scientists can&#8217;t agree on the meaning of evidence.  The evidence is what it is, so is the Bible.  We just need to be constantly striving to find the truth.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127102</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 18:19:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sfpulpit.com/2008/04/25/naturalisms-missionary-zeal/#comment-127102</guid>
					<description>Scarysnow,

You're right! We (i.e. Christians/believers) don't always agree about the exact meaning of certain scriptures. We pray. We ponder. We study, but we don't always agree.

Nonetheless, we Christians/believers almost certainly agree that it's all about JESUS! He said, "I am THE way, THE truth and THE life. No one comes to the Father (God) except through me." (John 14:6) "There is no other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we MUST be SAVED." (Acts 4:12). Saved from what? Saved from our SINS (i.e. our immorality, our lack of perfect goodness, our unrighteousness). (Matt 1:21) Saved from this PRESENT EVIL AGE. (Gal. 1:4). Saved from the COMING WRATH. (I Thes. 1:10)

"For GOD'S WRATH is (and will be) revealed from heaven against ALL GODLESSNESS and UNRIGHTEOUSNESS of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. From the CREATION OF THE WORLD His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been CLEARLY SEEN, being understood through what HE HAS MADE. As a result, people are WITHOUT EXCUSE. For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were DARKENED. (Romans 1:18-21)

God is light, and in HIM their is NO DARKNESS at all. Run to Him! Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be SAVED!

I don't know it all. None of us do. I can only tell you what I think and believe and lay it out there for your consideration. Jesus is a person that you must reckon with. History speaks of Him. The Bible tells us about Him. Creation points to Him. He's either legit or the biggest fraud every hoisted upon mankind. I commend Him to you!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scarysnow,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re right! We (i.e. Christians/believers) don&#8217;t always agree about the exact meaning of certain scriptures. We pray. We ponder. We study, but we don&#8217;t always agree.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, we Christians/believers almost certainly agree that it&#8217;s all about JESUS! He said, &#8220;I am THE way, THE truth and THE life. No one comes to the Father (God) except through me.&#8221; (John 14:6) &#8220;There is no other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we MUST be SAVED.&#8221; (Acts 4:12). Saved from what? Saved from our SINS (i.e. our immorality, our lack of perfect goodness, our unrighteousness). (Matt 1:21) Saved from this PRESENT EVIL AGE. (Gal. 1:4). Saved from the COMING WRATH. (I Thes. 1:10)</p>
<p>&#8220;For GOD&#8217;S WRATH is (and will be) revealed from heaven against ALL GODLESSNESS and UNRIGHTEOUSNESS of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. From the CREATION OF THE WORLD His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been CLEARLY SEEN, being understood through what HE HAS MADE. As a result, people are WITHOUT EXCUSE. For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were DARKENED. (Romans 1:18-21)</p>
<p>God is light, and in HIM their is NO DARKNESS at all. Run to Him! Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be SAVED!</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know it all. None of us do. I can only tell you what I think and believe and lay it out there for your consideration. Jesus is a person that you must reckon with. History speaks of Him. The Bible tells us about Him. Creation points to Him. He&#8217;s either legit or the biggest fraud every hoisted upon mankind. I commend Him to you!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
