Ark Encounter exec says they have enough funding to begin construction

So out of sheer curiosity, how do you determine the difference between the Holy Spirit and your own inner voice? And I'm not trying to infuse one ounce of sarcasm in that question. I'm genuinely curious.

Yeah, that's the thing that has always bothered me as well. I kind of settled on the idea that faith is useful for the things that we can't reconcile. I don't consider that weak or a flaw. I think a lot of folks don't like to hear that because of the idea that faith (in the Christian sense) often means serving God. I tend to believe that all faith is, to an extent, self-serving, and I don't have a problem with that.

OhioStater said:

So out of sheer curiosity, how do you determine the difference between the Holy Spirit and your own inner voice? And I'm not trying to infuse one ounce of sarcasm in that question. I'm genuinely curious.

It's very hard, but in my tradition the answer is community. In isolation it's very difficult. In conversation with other Christians and the world at large, there are a lot more checks and balances. It's harder to corrupt a large church (though obviously not impossible) than it is to corrupt a single person sitting in his/her study.

The U.S. governmental system of checks and balances is, in large part, based on Presbyterian theology and practice.

And yeah, what do you do with people who say, "The Holy Spirit told me to hate gays and Muslims"? I don't know. Love them?

ApolloAndy said:

I tend to be 99% in line with Gator on these things, but I do want to push back a little bit on one thing:

rollergator said:

I believe that the human mind, and science, should take us as far as they possibly can. Some questions remain unanswerable, and those, for the time being, are left up to one's beliefs (faith).

The problem with what I think is your interpretation is it means that as science advances, God retreats.

I tend to think of it more along the lines of "as Science advances, God's plan (outline, scheme, blueprint) is revealed."

See what I mean? Faith can always be convenient. :)

God knew you were going to say that.

I'm sure she did.

God makes inifinitely more sense as a female. Creation, nurturing, education, conservation...does any part of that sound like male energy? Not to me...

I think God wants men to be more like women in that way.

Further, the kind of angry, punishing God that makes NO sense to me at all (but MANY Christians seem to embrace)...undeniably male. I just can't wrap my head around a Cretor being that wouldn't have unconditional love for "the Children" (i.e., us).

As always, willing to be questioned, debated, even wrong. But my concept of God has more than enough love for those who believe me to be insane...

On the other hand, thousands of years ago when people had no universal transcendent rules to guide their behavior, commandments may have carried more weight from a masculine Father figure. My dad didn't have to be angry or punishing for me to stop in my tracks and listen to him.

It's kind of moot point really, if you believe that we are ALL made in God's image. :^)

Rollergator, are you a parent? Being a parent has really enlightened me to to some aspects I believe to be part of God's nature.

For example, I do have unconditional love for my 2 boys. That said, I still demand certain behaviors in my house. I do punish them in hopes to correct them and make them better men someday, and I forgive them. Someday, they will be on their own, and I hope they will choose to let me be part of their lives, but I won't force them to. And despite my unconditional love, there are a few extreme things they could do to result in getting kicked out of my house.

Most of all, I love it when they treat each other well when I'm not looking. :^)

If kids exhibit God's nature, then God went through several phases of serious dicketry.

I'm not saying kids exhibit God's nature, but parents.

In my analogy, replace my boys with humanity, and me the parent with God.

Sounds rather arrogant, doesn't it? :^)

For me, it fits nicely with the whole "God the Father", and "Our Father" conventions.

So if one of your kids pisses you off enough, you'll command one to build a boat and collect the cats and drown the other, right? Or are you more like "New Testament" god?

Well played, Ohio Stater. :^)

I'm not so good at creating floods, but if I was, I might be sorry I did and promise never again to do so, with a rainbow. Or so the story goes.

I just hope I don't have to take away a trip Banshee media day. That would be even worse than a flood!

:)

Amen.

You'll have to excuse me, I almost fell out of my chair at the sight of someone saying "well played" instead of getting all insulted and angry. As they say in Neverland...good form!

buckeye brad: All my kids have four legs. My ability (desire?) to be responsible was a serious consideration.

OhioStater said:

So if one of your kids pisses you off enough, you'll command one to build a boat and collect the cats and drown the other, right? Or are you more like "New Testament" god?

That depends on whether his kids were having sex with angels.

I'll be the first to admit that some things in the Bible baffle me and make me scratch my head. It helps me to consider the context and time when it was written.

For example, "Eye for an Eye" is often criticized for being barbaric, making the whole world blind, etc. But back in its day, that notion was a great moral leap forward in equality. It said that a peasant's eye was worth just as much as a rich man's eye. It also said that I couldn't kill you as revenge for injuring me. I think most people considered this an upgrade over the chaos of that time. Then the New Testament came along and did not retract it, but instead gave us a more sophisticated idea (Love your enemies, love your neighbors as yourself) that again elevated us. Perhaps the New Testament idea was too extreme for the Old Testament people? Beats me, but I think there is value to understanding the whole context. In the same way, the OT has many seemingly horrible rules about the treatment of women and slaves. Again, looking at the context, one could argue that those rules were huge improvements over what existed before. I'm not defending modern implementation of the ancient laws, because we are hopefully a more elevated society, and as somebody else here said we need to use our big brains to figure all this stuff out.

Getting back to the topic of the Ark Encounter, I hope that the creators and guests seek a greater purpose than a simple literal interpretation. Even if one believes that it is a fairy tale, we can still benefit from the wisdom in the story.