[CS-FSLUG] OT: Potter, Halloween and Philipians 4:8

[doc]

I apologize for being a bit obtuse.

Simply put, I am underwhelmed by much of what was
done to Christianity during the Renaissance, therefore
appeals to the human rationalism of the Renaissance
fail in theological discussion.

That non-Biblical authors argued for intellectual
syncretism wherein which the holy is carelessly intermingled
with the profane reduces rather that raises them in my esteem.

I may be well-equipped to separate the gold from the dross
but I find efforts to generalize that Bible-like literature
is generically acceptable/Biblically inoffensive as recommended
reading theologically sloppy, at best.

That the few are informed and discerning is not the
reference point from which we formulate recommendations.
We must consider the least else we fail to either "feed"
or "protect" His child-like sheep.

Contemporary moral equivelance arguments often appear to
appeal to Renaissance syncretism as they extrapolate
principles across centuries and contexts.  This is why
I noted that a similar course of reasoning, absent a
rational assumptive, could result in paralleling Islam
and Christianity.

doc

>> I find the "Gee, some old dead white guys in the very
>> worldly Renaissance said it was a good idea ..."
>> argument unpersuasive.
> 
> 	I'm not saying you should believe it because they believed it, but I  
> am saying I think they were right. (And some of their arguments are  
> rather convincing to that effect, too, if you read them -- it is  
> terribly dense, but Pico's Oration on the Dignity of Man is a rather  
> interesting and good read on the subject.)
> 
>> Islam acknowledges Christ and shares a lot of text
>> with the Bible.  Should we propose that Islam is
>> equally true alongside Christianity?
> 
> 	I don't follow where your coming from on this -- it doesn't seem to  
> be relevant to the discussion, but just to avoid any doubts on my  
> position: "no, of course not."
> 
> 	-Tim