Tuesday, September 14, 2004


I read this article out of a newspaper up in Michigan today.


It sets the real context of liberty that anyone with a basic
understanding of God's will and God's purposes for man should be
able to simply understand. It is sadly apparent that Mr. Obama,
Mayor Daley, and Senator Kerry do not have that apprently BASIC
understanding of God


Bweezy said...

How can anyone have an understanding of God? I can't believe that anyone on this planet is arrogant enough to believe that they, with their simple mortal minds, are capable of understanding something as far-reaching and grand as the concept of God.

Personally, I think this planet would be better off if everyone stopped trying to speak on behalf of God, and just let God, whoever or whatever that may be, speak out on his or her own behalf.

Kevin J Bowman said...


Thank you for your comments. It is true that the human mind can not possess the ability to fully understand the existence and nature of God. It is true that God is beyond a simple mortal concept. I also think that people should refrain from speaking for God and allow God to speak on his own behalf. This is exactly what scripture supposes to do. In the article referenced in this post Mr. Swank list 11 separate verses from God’s inspired word to demonstrate God’s spoken message on this subject.

Outside the context of faith and submission to the written word of God one has no grounds to judge what is God’s speech. So we are left to rely only then on faith in his inspired word to direct us to an understanding of the relationship between our time and God’s precious spoken message.


Bweezy said...

And thoughtful as those comments may be - they have one fundamental flaw - the presupposition that "scripture" is indeed the word of "God". The last time I checked, God did not come to earth with his laptop (ok, his parchments and stone tablets) and write scripture.

As far as I can tell, scripture is the creation of man. Belief in the divine status of scripture is therefore not based on logic, but on faith, and as such, the pronouncement of scripture as "God's Word" is once more tantamount to speaking on God's behalf, or making assumptions on his/her behalf that may well be incorrect.

Kevin J Bowman said...


You are absolutely correct in your assertion that "Belief in the divine status of scripture is therefore not based on logic, but on faith"

In the context of that faith Dr. Keyes' point is to those who share his faith in the divine status of scripture. If a person does not share that faith then the point of what scripture says on any issue is irrelevant.

In the case of Senator Kerry and Mayor Daley both these men claim to be Catholics like Dr. Keyes and therefore would share his reverance for scripture as the "speech of the divine" It would be therefore be responsible to say that within the context of an Orthodox Christian faith that both these men lack the understanding of the orthodox position of their faith.

My argument, and I would venture to say Dr. Keyes' argument, is that people of faith in scripture can and should use that scripture as the moral basis for both their personal and political decisions. I would not venture to feel that a person without faith in the Bible would at all care anyway as to how Jesus would vote.

Thank you once again for your thoughts.

Bweezy said...

Cool - thanks for your thoughtful responses. This was very pleasnat and insightful.