06-14-2016, 10:36 PM
(06-14-2016, 06:21 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(06-14-2016, 05:20 PM)radind Wrote:(06-14-2016, 04:59 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(06-14-2016, 04:48 PM)radind Wrote: I do like a dialogue, but there needs to be an exchange as Bohm defined it.
Quote:https://www2.clarku.edu/difficultdialogu.../index.cfm
..."The object of a dialogue is not to analyze things, or to win an argument, or to exchange opinions. Rather, it is to suspend your opinions and to look at the opinions—to listen to everybody's opinions, to suspend them, and to see what all that means.... We can just simply share the appreciation of the meanings, and out of this whole thing, truth emerges unannounced—not that we have chosen it.
Everything can move between us. Each person is participating, is partaking of the whole meaning of the group and also taking part in it. We can call that a true dialogue.
Dialogue is the collective way of opening up judgments and assumptions"
That's good. But it's a bit like hedging your bets. If you are going to call something "Christian" that SOME Christians believe in, and say it's Bible-based, but then call for a "holistic approach," aren't you begging the question? What is "easy Christianity" that "lacks true faith," and what isn't? What is really LEGIT Christianity, and WHO SAYS SO?
Don't you have to, in a "holistic" approach, be more open to other interpretations made by other Christian philosophers? Like Paul Tillich, for example. Or existentialists. Or New Thought? Or Christian mystics? How can your approach be the "true faith" and "Bible based," but not "engineered" from the Bible itself?
I have read fairly widely over the past decades and I do feel strongly that a Biblical worldview is key. My objection ( pet peeve) is the constant demand for 'book, chapter, verse' from my associates when I think that an overall picture( meta-narrative) is important. I have evolved to my current worldview, but open discussion is still good.
I like the concept of Popper of 'Conjectures and Refutations'.
You seem to have dismissed my references. Just curious to see if you have read any works of N. T Wright, John Lennox, Ravi Zacharias & William Lane Craig
No. Why should I read them, rather than the works I like by the groups I mentioned?
Just as open investigation.
… whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. Phil 4:8 (ESV)