My Journal

On world religions, I group them into two.

1. Cultural religions:
- For those who follow the religions of a particular culture, family, crowds, etc.
- Theists, Atheists, Agnostics.
- Believers are generally very shallow in knowledge of their religions. Proving otherwise   usually results in nonsense.

2. Doctrinal religions:
- For those who believe truth matters.
- Theists, Atheists, Agnostics.
- Believers tend to study their religions thoroughly.

Once the above has been established, I shall disregard the first category and focus on the second.

From the second category, it is easily broken into yet another two groups:

2. Doctrinal religions:
A. Grace based
- God revealed, perfect, truth
- Christianity

B. Work based
- Men made, imperfect, false
- All religions except Christianity

Now, one can start reading Calvin's Institutes.

I've touched on similar topic before. This entry clarifies the former in simplicity:

When some love to praise me, I measure them in a strictest and disciplined manner, as justly as it can be done. Should they retaliate and respond angrily, then they have just proven their fakeness in their praises; Should they humbly learn from me, their praises were sincere and they are worthy for the fellowship of the saints in Christ.

4 things:

1)

John 8:6

St. Jerome has a wonderful insight on what was Jesus writing on the ground. That Jesus inscribed the sins of the woman's accusers, based on Jeremiah 17:13. Judge not, lest ye be judged...

N2 indirectly used Bede's commentary that Jesus was the creator and the law giver whose fingers wrote the law. This is agreeable, but Jerome simply took it further in speculation.

2)

The story of the woman caught in adultery is actually missing in early manuscript until Codex Bezae (5th century Greek-Latin manuscript). Augustine thought that the "removal" of such passage was to not encourage adultery. This passage is also said to be less known among the Greeks and especially Byzantine Christians.

3)

It is interesting to note that the Jews define adultery as only applies to sexual misconduct involving a married woman. That means a married man who has sexual intercourse with an unmarried woman is technically not committing adultery. Think "the sin of concubinage". It is only after the modern law, that the Jews permitted their women to divorce their husbands likewise. It would appear that the later Jews attempt to defend, through their Talmud, that the woman was accused by the husband who had not committed such crime himself. I think this to be an unfair stretch of the original story simply to justify the absence of the partner of the adulteress. On the side note on a mamzer (bastard), who is not to be involved with Jewish affairs, I see that king Solomon would technically not be a mamzer, since David's mamzer (some Jews do not consider David's crime an adultery - something about the Talmudic revelation of how Jewish soldiers temporarily "divorced" their wives in case they die in battles and thereby set their wives free to marry anyone else) has been struck by God, and that Uriah had been dead already.

4) Stoning

It is noteworthy to point out that the stoning of an adulterer was not referring to Lev 20:10 (married woman), but Deu 22:23 (virgin/betrothed woman) instead. For they are two completely different case. The Jews had it that if stoning was not mentioned in the Torah, the default death penalty fell on strangling.

The above, I learned, indirectly, from the Friday Bible Study at Ling's place. "Why did you not share Jerome's with the class?", my wife asked. I thought to myself - cast not thy pearls to swine, lest they trample them under their feet.

Nabeel Qureshi, for one.

The Q&A at the end was good.

I take my limited experience from Redeemer.

Many of the Redeemer classes are apparently geared towards new believers. I want to grant the benefit of the doubt. But just to be fair, if it were the case, that Sunday Bible classes are meant for non-believers/new believers, ALL/most of the classes, then I must ask...do other believers/older members need any Bible lessons anymore?

The answer expected could be: Well, we have community groups (fellowships).

My response: Many of the fellowships aren't taught to be experts. In fact, they were merely sharing, or at best, guided (printout materials) sharing/discussions. Are there no expert obligations for the faithful believers? - Don't answer, I can answer for you - you want to say "let them go enroll at seminaries, right?" Behold, the collapse of Western theology.

I think when serious professional Bible studies aren't geared toward faithful believers, it maintains or creates a proud sense of attitude towards non-believers/new comers. "We are the learned", "we are the wise Christians", "we don't study together with non/new believers".

The reason I give Redeemer the benefit of the doubt is because there are classes that many long-term believers today would fail at: Apologetics and Predestination. But if they were to dumb down these classes out of an ulterior motive (as mentioned above), then it would be pathetic.