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

[Timothy Butler]

> I apologize for being a bit obtuse.

	I guessed what you explained below, but I didn't want to assume  
since I don't believe my argument would reach that particular  
destination.

> 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.

	Well, I think everything points to God to some extent, it is just a  
question of precisely how corrupt the image of God is in a given  
work. The sacred/profane distinction isn't always useful.

> 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.

	I wouldn't say Bible-like literature is generally Biblically  
inoffensive or a good source of theology.

	Ok, let me explain. Personally, I am of the camp that believes there  
is general revelation. I think everyone has at least some access to  
revelation from God, and that likely you will find this in societies  
never contacted by Christians. The World Religions all address  
certain concerns for good reason. However, this knowledge of God is  
*not* a saving knowledge -- I wouldn't ever tell people to close thy  
Bible and open thy Vedas. As a member of the Theology of Crisis  
school of thought, it is entirely the wrong to approach a knowledge  
of God from a method other than His special revelation to us in  
Christ Jesus.

	However, I see the usefulness of studying other texts for various  
reasons -- apologetic, academic/critical, etc.

> 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.

	No, of course not. However, we should work to the point that more  
are informed and discerning. You don't become informed and discerning  
by becoming isolationist (and I'm not saying you are, but many are).

> 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.

	You can go a lot of ways with Renaissance thought, that's true.  
However, I think a lot of it was fruitful; really in the late  
Medieval/early Renaissance times, especially. Aquinas, of course,  
comes to mind, and while I wouldn't call it a theological work,  
Dante's Divine Comedy also draws on Greco-Roman mythology in addition  
to Christian in a useful way.

	-Tim

---
Timothy R. Butler | "Not  every end  is the  goal.  The end  of a
Editor, OfB.biz   | melody is not its goal,  and yet if  a melody
tbutler at ofb.biz   | has not  reached its end , it has not reached
timothybutler.us  | its goal."
                                            -- Friedrich Nietzsche