Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

54 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 2:50 AM (GMT -6)

The question I’m posing here is: “Can non-Christians genuinely love?” I’m inclined to answer this “no” and will get to my reasons as I engage Semeia a bit. I am open to being convinced otherwise. I thought her response was good, and though I’m not absolutely certain that my reasons for a “no” answer to this question are good, I wanna go ahead argue from this point of view.

Here is Semeia’s response to me (from the Love and Torture thread, page 1,437 [:]). I’ll just post it here and then come back on a separate post.

-------------------

Tom: I question the claim that atheists and advocates of belief systems which openly deny Christ are capable of producing the outrageous love of 1 Cor.

Semeia: Then how come they do? Are you really trying to claim that Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, and atheists do not love as much as Christians do? That is the opposite of my experience. With few exceptions, the most judgmental and least compassionate people I have encountered in my life have been Christians.

Tom: So I’m not sure what it would even mean to say that I feel aligned with Buddhists or Behai folk who “love outrageously.” This divorces belief and practice in a way I think is not biblical. As hard as John hammers on love in 1 John, he equally hammers on the theological foundation of outrageous love, a particular view of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.

Semeia: A person can love outrageously, thereby being in union with the Creator, without having ever encountered the Bible.

If you believe that non-Christian belief systems CANNOT produce outrageous love, then you will dismiss the love you encounter in non-Christians as a matter of doctrine. But that is a mental process that you are in complete control of, and I urge you to reconsider your belief. To live in a Muslim country and hold the belief that the people you are living in the midst of are not capable of outrageous love unless they convert to your belief system will be, for you, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I have known people of all faiths (including atheism) to be capable of outrageous love and self-sacrifice. I have also known people of all faiths to be capable of evil.

Christians in general, especially those who manage to get public hearing, tend to be among the most self-satisfied, judgmental, and rigid of the faiths, other than outright terrorist fringe groups. I remember in college how much more at home I felt with my Jewish friends, whose mix of penetrating intellectual discourse and self-deprecating humor and personal warmth made me feel far more welcome and loved (even as a non-Jew) than any group of Christians ever had.
Love is what it does - and Christians are no better at it than anyone else (in spite of what Jesus and Paul had to say about its centrality) in part because they think it has anything at all to do with doctrine, which has no more to do with actual love than the idea or principle of "life" has to do with actually being alive.

----END---—

Plus:

Semeia: PS, Tom, it was great meeting you here! So sorry that my first communication with you since it is to strongly reject what you're saying!

Tom: No problem “Sweetie,” “Babe,” “Hun”!

That’s an inside joke I picked up when I was in St. Paul, right Semeia? Just jokin! Hey, I loved meeting everybody. Awesome time!

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 10/11/2002 3:56 AM (GMT -6)

Hey Bubba,

, I await your post.

Thanks,
Semeia

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 4:05 AM (GMT -6)

Please make sure that your seat-belts are fastened and that your seats and trays are in their upright and locked position. We're taking off..

OK, let me respond to Semeia a bit and then throw out some other thoughts.

Tom (Previously): I question the claim that atheists and advocates of belief systems which openly deny Christ are capable of producing the outrageous love of 1 Cor.

Semeia (Previously): Then how come they do? Are you really trying to claim that Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, and atheists do not love as much as Christians do?

Tom: For sure not. What I want to claim is that those who are not, let me use Paul’s phrase, “in Christ,” (i.e., born again) are incapable of loving as they OUGHT. Since Christians often live beneath their calling, it won’t help to compare they way non-Christians love with the way Christians sometimes love or don’t love. Christians aren’t the standard, right? I was trying to relate how non-Christians do love, even how much they are capable of loving as non-Christians, so the “outrageous” sort of God-love that Paul describes in 1 Cor. 13.

Tom (Previously): So I’m not sure what it would even mean to say that I feel aligned with Buddhists or Behai folk who “love outrageously.” This divorces belief and practice in a way I think is not biblical. As hard as John hammers on love in 1 John, he equally hammers on the theological foundation of outrageous love, a particular view of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.

Semeia (Previously): A person can love outrageously, thereby being in union with the Creator, without having ever encountered the Bible. If you believe that non-Christian belief systems CANNOT produce outrageous love, then you will dismiss the love you encounter in non-Christians as a matter of doctrine. But that is a mental process that you are in complete control of, and I urge you to reconsider your belief.

Tom: There’s a lot here. And this is my basic beef. If a person can love outrageously, can evidence the love of the Cross, without embracing the Christ of the Cross, in fact, while explicitly denying God and Christ, then what happens to Christ’s “uniqueness” as love, as source of love, as that “without which” love is not possible?

I gather you don’t think Christ therefore plays a “unique” role in producing the sort of love that is God, that is the Cross, that’s described in 1 Cor. 13? We can love genuinely, godly, and outrageously without Christ. Right?

Semeia: To live in a Muslim country and hold the belief that the people you are living in the midst of are not capable of outrageous love unless they convert to your belief system will be, for you, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Tom: Maybe I should just tell them to be better Muslims. Why complicate things by introducing Jesus?

Semeia: I have known people of all faiths (including atheism) to be capable of outrageous love and self-sacrifice. I have also known people of all faiths to be capable of evil.

Tom: I hear ya. But this is what I want to explore. It’s been a while, but I recall Finney’s chapter on the attributes of love. He argues, for example, that a “Christ-centered intention” is what makes our acts of love and sacrifice acceptable to God. I would put it this way: “Even the BEST we can do is still only acceptable to the Father through the blood of Christ.”

I don’t feel comfortable saying Muslim men don’t love their wives (well, some of them at least) or that atheists don’t live (by some definition of the words) upright and moral lives. But I’m more uncomfortable saying their love and morality is what it CAN or OUGHT to be, what Christ died to make it. If such people live the sort of life (which love is anyhow) that Christ said HE came to give us (life, and more abundantly) without Christ, then what’s Christ for? Saying they can love without Christ is saying that their need of Christ and relating to Christ has nothing to do with living (since living is essentially about loving). Let me ask it this way Semeia: What unique, indispensable role do you think Christ, or a relationship to Christ, plays in a life of love? If Muslims love as humans OUGHT to love without embracing the life and love of Christ, then what unique sort of love am I introducing them to by urging them to consider accepting Christ? Or does their acceptance of Christ have nothing to do with life?

Semeia: Christians in general, especially those who manage to get public hearing, tend to be among the most self-satisfied, judgmental, and rigid of the faiths, other than outright terrorist fringe groups.

Tom: Granted, we can really miss the mark. But we’re not the standard. How WE imperfectly love is not what I’m comparing non-Christian faiths to. But along these lines, Jesus claims that “people will know you my disciples by your love” (Jn 13.35). If we deny that there is a love which is uniquely and indispensably relating to knowing Christ, then we empty Jesus’ words of meaning. I mean, if Muslims, Buddhists, and atheists are capable of THIS kind of love, then Jesus was simply wrong. There would be no reason for people who observe genuine LOVE among us to assume we’re Christians. They might as readily ASSUME we’re atheists.

Semeia (Previously): Love is what it does…

Tom: And Jesus is who he is. I’m wondering whether or not love being what it is has ANYTHING to do with Jesus being who he is.

Semeia: … and Christians are no better at it than anyone else (in spite of what Jesus and Paul had to say about its centrality)…

Tom: Right. But of course I’m not placing “Christians” in the equation, comparing how Muslims or atheists love with how Christians love. I’m placing Jesus in the equation, comparing how Muslims or atheists, and anybody else who has not the life of Christ in them, loves with how JESUS loves and wants to love through them.

Semeia: …in part because they think it has anything at all to do with doctrine, which has no more to do with actual love than the idea or principle of "life" has to do with actually being alive.

Tom: I’m suspicious of the notion that God’s love working in us and through us has nothing whatsoever to do with belief in God, belief in Christ, or deciding how one relates to the Cross. The writers of the NT letters spend too much time on belief to justify the claim that belief has nothing to do with living rightly (and isn’t love the essence of right living?). This all involves beliefs (OK, doctrines if you will). I’m not saying that holding to a doctrine produces the reality of love in our life. 1 Cor. 13 expressly forbids this. But should 1 Cor. 13 be understood to mean correct belief has “nothing” to do with love? Should we assume that because one can offer her body to the flames, explain mysteries, and give her wealth to feed the poor without love that love, therefore, doesn’t do these things, isn’t characterized by them, or doesn’t have anything at all to do with doing these things?

Though it’s true that one can offer one’s body to the flames without love, it’s also true that “there is no greater love than that one should give her life for another.” John says, “You cannot love God and hate your neighbor.” I think this entails, “You cannot love your neighbor and hate God.” Can you love your neighbor and deny God’s existence? Can you love your neighbor and deny the infinite value of the greatest act of love ever, the Cross? Can I really value my neighbor with the infinite sort of love Christ calls us to exemplify while disbelieving in Christ?

I don’t have all the answers here, but I just don’t think the answer is as simple as, “Hey, doctrine and belief don’t have anything to do with love, and anybody regardless of their belief system can genuinely love.” I hope I’m explaining myself clearly.

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 10/11/2002 09:08:40 AM

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/11/2002 4:38 AM (GMT -6)

Shenaya: I think my parents could be used as an example here. They believe Jesus was one of many good teachers yet they embody what I view as outrageous love. They are constantly in giving mode, and believe in extending love to all individuals emphasizing the worth of all beings and support non-violence amongst humanity.

They walk the talk of their love. How could this change or be "improved" if they became Christians? It would help to get an answer to this question.

~Shenaya~

GODesteem
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 34

Posted 10/11/2002 4:57 AM (GMT -6)

"Shenaya: I think my parents could be used as an example here. They believe Jesus was one of many good teachers yet they embody what I view as outrageous love. They are constantly in giving mode, and believe in extending love to all individuals emphasizing the worth of all beings and support non-violence amongst humanity.

They walk the talk of their love. How could this change or be "improved" if they became Christians? It would help to get an answer to this question."

Greetings to Shenaya and Tom! While I could explain with many paragraphs what my thoughts were on this issue, and bore many to death, I think two verses sum it up.

Gal 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.

I have actually seen this verse at the bottom of Mr. Boyd's posts! The second verse goes along with it...

Rom 14:23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

1 Cor 10:31 Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

Okay, so it was three verses. The key to anything a person does, is how they relate the action to GOD. Those who are not Christians do not "KNOW" GOD, and hence cannot possibly have a motivation to glorify GOD in EVERYTHING they do (see above verse!). The second, and very related point, is FAITH. As someone once said, "Faith is trusting in all that God promises for us in Jesus." Without faith, anything we do is SIN (again, see above verse)! How can this be, you say? Simple - faith magnifies the glorious ALL-Sufficiency of GOD, trusting Him to provide all of the resources needed so that we can love ((including the "love", which is a fruit of the SPIRIT!). By Faith in His Grace, we get the help, and GOD gets the glory! If you do not live by faith, then you are belittling GOD, thinking that you can do anything without His help. Make sense?

1 Tim 1:5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

How can an unbeliever ever love someone in an ultimate sense, "from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and a sincere faith"? Faith in what???

If you need more clarification, I would be more than delighted to explain! God is our greatest treasure!

God loves Himself more than anything... He is our greatest treasure!

Semeia
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522

Posted 10/11/2002 5:27 AM (GMT -6)

Tom and Shenaya,

I love this conversation, and I look forward to answering your questions. But I probably can't do them justice until tonight for two reasons:

1) At the top of my list of things to do today is Clean the Basement. Or, Clean the Anxiety-producing Festering Cesspool of Garbage that Lurks like my Disturbed Id at the Bottom of the Stairs - Stairs that should be marked by Yellow Crime Scene Tape: DO NOT CROSS!

AND

2) It is supposed to get up into the seventies today, and tomorrow it drops thirty degrees and SNOW FLURRIES are forecast. So if I was going to procrastinate on my Clean the Basement or Die action item, I must confess getting outside would be higher on the list than being inside on the computer - even if it is to talk about love! What can I say - I'm a fallen human being! And winter is breathing down our necks here in Minnesota. Have compassion for the geographically challenged!

Anyone want to take bets on how far I get with the basement?

Thanks,
Semeia

PS - Welcome, Shenaya!

"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 5:38 AM (GMT -6)

Godesteem-

Hey brother! I thought your comments were insightful. The Galatians verse is especially interesting. In Christ it's not this or that, but faith working through love that matters. Seems to me that if unbelievers love in this sense, then being "in Christ" is inconsequential to what ultimately matters, LOVE.

I'm tempted to define love as a sort of continuum that climaxes for us in a love which is only possible through union with Christ. But further down on the scale it remains possible for unbelieving couples to love one another, and unbelieving parents to love their kids, etc. Being on the same continuum, this latter love is an imperfect reflection of God's love. And it's our being in the image of God, even in our disconnected state, that accounts, I think, for this continuum.

Make sense?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 10/11/2002 5:48 AM (GMT -6)

Can I butt in here? Thank you! (Now move it over and make some room--you're crowd'n me, YOU'RE CROWD'N ME, ALREADY! Sheesh, what's a person gotta do to get a little elbow room?!)

I wonder if we shouldn't, then, carry over the concept of differentiating between that love of the Christian and that love of the non-Christian to include good deeds ("for by their fruit you will know them.") And what else can be included?

Can a non-Christian do good deeds within the same context of a Christian? I mean, is it just good deeds in general that Jesus meant when He said others would know us by them? Is there something different about a good deed of a Christian verses a good deed of a non-Christian? Is there something different about how a Christian loves verses how a non-Christain loves?

I think something can be said about the generality of love and good deeds; Christian and non-Christian alike possess them. But the minute a Christian walks into relationship with God, into the new sphere where all things are new (the old is gone because we've been translated out of it), love and good deeds obviously take on a different perspective, but I don't know that the act of loving and good deeds in and of themselves are different. Their focus (in a relationship with God) is certainly altered.

I don't believe you could situate the Apostle John next to the nicest non-Christian and be able to clearly make the demarcation: John's obviously a Christian, and the other guy isn't. I contend that the NT's concept of love, particularly noted by John, isn't to produce something of love that the world has just never seen (though that's easily read into the interpretation), but to talk about how our love, as Christians, exists within a different sphere than the world's way of loving. I think this equally goes for good deeds. I mean, how many good deeds do you have to do to be recognized as a Christian? Further, how can you do a good deed any differently than Gandi did his good deeds? The outsider is never going to say "Surely Gandi's not a Christian, but boy, look at that guy over there; he's gotta be a Christian; his good deeds are done differently."

Maybe, then, loving and doing good deeds/works is all about the context and sphere of existance--those who are citizens of heaven verses those who aren't--is what makes the difference.

For loving and doing good,

Starkman

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 10/11/2002 6:19 AM (GMT -6)

One wonders whether Christ was unique at all (or whether there is a need for Christ to come) when "christians" are talking about other faiths loving "outrageously". Apparently in such a view there is no need for Christ at all...

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 10/11/2002 6:21 AM (GMT -6)

Shenaya: it seems to me that you are saying that your parents are perfect. As if they have no need for improvement at all. In that case, I would assume they wouldn't need Jesus...

writerdad
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448

Posted 10/11/2002 6:24 AM (GMT -6)

Semeia: what you do is you take the best of other religions and the worst of Christianity and then say, "see, how can we judge?" Hardly a fair standard for a non-judgmental person to use in judging...

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 10/11/2002 7:28 AM (GMT -6)

Christ did not come to show us how to love. We do, however, learn to love not only more completely but in a right position of purpose; as those in relationship with God. Christ came to destroy the works of Satan, to set captives free, to create the open door for us to walk through and find relationship with God.

God loves. Indeed, His essence demonstrates the epitome of love. But mankind made in His image loves also; pretty skewed, yes, but it's still from the same image of love given us inside all of mankind. When Paul talked about love I Corinthians, the context wasn't about Christians loving in some manner unknown to the unsaved, it was to simply stress the fact that all else in life is vain if there isn't love--not some special, extra love that the world doesn't have, but love that any descent human being should have. Will the sinner express it like the Christian is supposed to? Maybe a few will, but for the most part, no.

Starkman

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/11/2002 9:55 AM (GMT -6)

[quote]
I have the day off so I can indulge in this hobby today, and I don't have the threat of snow flurries breathing down my neck. eww!

Shenaya: Writerdad, I am puzzled as to how you could deduce from what I said that I think my parents are perfect or that they don't need Christ. Odd.

Moving on: how could one even say that the love they portray isn't true love? Many people of many faiths, or of no faith at all offer love, and sacrifice, even to the point of death. To me that smells, tastes and looks like love so how come we would even want to say otherwise? What is our basis for calling it something other than true love?

I don't beleive that if my parents became Christians that their love would look or feel any different. So why is Christian love different? That is what I am getting at.I am curious, am I hearing anyone saying love = salvation whether Christ is the center of that love or not? Another question: Does our love button only get turned on when we profess Christ?

I appreciate the responses to my thoughts so far. I am looking forward to Semeia's response. Thank you for the welcome.

Love and Peace

~Shenaya~

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 10:42 AM (GMT -6)

Peace and Love people-

Starkman: I contend that the NT's concept of love, particularly noted by John, isn't to produce something of love that the world has just never seen…but to talk about how our love, as Christians, exists within a different sphere than the world's way of loving. I think this equally goes for good deeds. I mean, how many good deeds do you have to do to be recognized as a Christian? Further, how can you do a good deed any differently than Gandi did his good deeds? The outsider is never going to say "Surely Gandi's not a Christian, but boy, look at that guy over there; he's gotta be a Christian; his good deeds are done differently." [my bold]

Tom: OK I’m tracking. So how are unbelievers suppose to know we are Christian “by our love”? I mean, what is this “different sphere than the world’s way of loving”? If love is the same accross the board, if our acts of love are perfectly paralleled by the world's, then how does the world deduce we’re Christians by OUR love?

Perhaps the don't "deduce" anything by our love, except that what we believe is worth listening to. My guess is that love, genuine love, IS God’s love. What other kind of love is there? Right? So I’m perfectly happy to concede that unbelievers can possess this because, as I mentioned before, human beings reflect the image of God (who IS love) even in their unredeemed state. So perhaps "love," in Jesus’ claim “they will know you are my followers by your love” is to be understood as a “confirmation” of and not the “indication” (I hope I explain this clearly) of the gospel we proclaim. That is, love and good works are not to be understood theologically apart from the mission of the Church to proclaim Christ. As we proclaim Christ, as we share his story with our neighbors and friends, our love, kindness, and good deeds testifies to the genuineness of our proclamation. No one single act of love, no series of acts of love in fact, can declare to the world that we are Christ’s apart from OUR declaring that we are Christ’s. Love comes in to confirm this. Yes? No?

OK. But what about Muslims or atheists who live consistently loving lives, consistently moral lives, consistently give and sacrifice as a testimony to THEIR faith or atheism? (And now I think I hear Mephi typing out a post. I’ll wait for him.)

Shenaya: So why is Christian love different? That is what I am getting at. I am curious…

Tom: So am I! And welcome to the site Shenaya. Good to have you here.

I see your point about your parents. This is why I’m wondering, as I said in my previous post, whether love is one and same whether it’s a Christian, Muslim, or atheist. But love is a continuum. The image of God in us, even as unbelievers, as unconnected to Christ, is such that love is possible. But still there’s a dimension of love, kindness, gentleness, peace of mind, joy (why limit this discussion to love!), and intensification, a…FULFILLMENT of these which is only found in Christ. You should be able to say to your parents, “Mom and Dad, I’ve always admired how deeply you love each other, but I believe Christ can intensify that love and make it even more meaningful for you both.” If we CAN’T say this to your folks, then maybe it’s because WE are poverty stricken ourselves. Maybe we followers of Christ experience so little of the depth of God’s love that we ourselves mistake the world’s love (which is genuinely on the same continuum as what God wants to give us in Christ) for the ultimate love of God, the world’s joy for the ultimate joy of God, the world’s peace of mind for the peace that passes understanding.

Tom

PS Doc, does this discussion belong back on your Love and Torture thread? Dude, I'm sorry to move it over here. I thought it would take us in a different direction! Arrghhh.

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 10/11/2002 3:50:25 PM

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 10:59 AM (GMT -6)

Semeia-

If doctrines and beliefs aren't what define us as followers of Christ, and if love is not what defines us as followers of Christ (because, as you say, all faiths love; nothing unique there) then pray tell...

...what DOES define us as followers of Christ?

It's not doctrinal.
It's not behavioral.
It's not in what we say.
It's no in what we do.

Where is it? And what is it? What DOES reveal to the world our identity as follower's of Christ?

Again, is there ANYTHING unique about what Christ is and does in us that has anything to do with love?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 10/11/2002 4:06:51 PM

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted 10/11/2002 11:03 AM (GMT -6)

Question: Can non-Christians genuinely love?

Answer; YES!

(Sex is a good example. By its creational norm it is one--if not the most--way to be totally for the "other.")

Go'en camping with my boys, now. LATER!

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 11:21 AM (GMT -6)

A Nazi dies for his country. Is this love?

Hitler loved his mother, maybe even did some “kind” things for others. He signs a command to execute more Jews at 11 AM and five minutes later gives permission to build an orphanage for German children.

A Nazi prison warden listens to the pleas of a Jewish mother and decides not to kill her child. Is this a “genuinely kind” or “loving” act?

I've been in Galilee and visited the beautiful church build on the traditional site where Jesus gave the Sermon on the Mount. Popes have visited it too. Who built it? Musolini.

Does the overall orientation of one’s life have anything to do with defining whether an act is considered by God to be “good” or “loving”? Hitler builds a school for orphans. Mother Theresa builds a school for orphans. These MUST be different acts.

Paul discusses the two main “orientations” of life as “life in the flesh” and “life in the Spirit.” Theologically, all that proceeds from a life oriented in the flesh is of the flesh, is not faith, and does not please God. If Paul himself would not admit that the love he described in 1 Cor. 13 is the heart and soul of a life oriented to the Spirit, then I don't know anything about Paul. (Let's NOT put that to a vote folks!)

How do people reorient their lives from being “in the flesh” (which biblically is life outside of Christ) to being “in the Spirit”? What accomplishes this transformation?

Jesus? Muhammad? Buddha? Atheism?

Thoughts?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 10/11/2002 4:29:33 PM

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 11:24 AM (GMT -6)

quote:
Question: Can non-Christians genuinely love?

Answer; YES! Sex is a good example. By its creational norm it is one--if not the most--way to be totally for the "other."

Gee thanks Al. OK folks, let's close up shop. Our questions have been answered. Next thread?

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/11/2002 12:04 PM (GMT -6)

quote:

Question: Can non-Christians genuinely love?

Answer; YES!

(Sex is a good example. By its creational norm it is one--if not the most--way to be totally for the "other.")

Shenaya: Sex can also be one of the most selfish and unloving acts. So what is the point here?

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 3:22 PM (GMT -6)

quote:
Shenaya: Sex can also be one of the most selfish and unloving acts. So what is the point here?

Yes, sex can be a very selfish act. Christians are no different than non-Christians here. We both misuse sex and express love through it. Non-Christians do the same. Some would say that this in itself shows that there's nothing unique about the presence of Christ in a person's life with respect to LOVE. If Jesus is present, love may or may not follow. If Jesus isn't present, love may or may not follow. It's this which I'm exploring.

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Springs
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 636

Posted 10/11/2002 3:52 PM (GMT -6)

Welcome Shenaya!

Yo Tom, good thoughts on the experience of God's love being one thing that's unique about love in Christ.

Perhaps the love a person is capable of giving in Christ is unique because of its self sacrificial quality. I know that a non-Christian parent can naturally love a child sacrificially, but there are cases where Christians love their enemies at great cost to themselves. Do atheists do this? (non-rhetorical) There are times when Christians love anonymously at great cost to themselves, do those without Christ do this also? When I act alone as the lover I take the glory for it. When God loves through me I glorify him. If I didn’t ever glorify him by loving as he loves, and giving him the credit for the creation and execution of that love, would I take so much glory to myself that I would begin to think I was a god? Would I fall into pride?

Springs

Shenaya
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 22

Posted 10/11/2002 4:41 PM (GMT -6)

Springs:

quote:

Welcome Shenaya!

Yo Tom, good thoughts on the experience of God's love being one thing that's unique about love in Christ.

Perhaps the love a person is capable of giving in Christ is unique because of its self sacrificial quality. I know that a non-Christian parent can naturally love a child sacrificially, but there are cases where Christians love their enemies at great cost to themselves. Do atheists do this? (non-rhetorical) There are times when Christians love anonymously at great cost to themselves, do those without Christ do this also? When I act alone as the lover I take the glory for it. When God loves through me I glorify him. If I didn’t ever glorify him by loving as he loves, and giving him the credit for the creation and execution of that love, would I take so much glory to myself that I would begin to think I was a god? Would I fall into pride?

Springs

Shenaya:It seems that I am just playing the devil's advocate here but I see it like this: Non-Christians also love anonymously. Many non-believers support charities, orphanages, etc. out of the love in their hearts for people who are less fortunate. I don't see all non-Christians as seeking out glory and attention through their giving. As I see it pride is not always(even usually?)the outcome when someone is truly giving out of compassion(of course there are those giving solely for the purposes of a tax write off, or their name in the newspaper). Non-Christians also weep at horrors of the world like starving children, the tragedy of innocents dying at the hands of ruthless rulers or terrorists, or children living in rat infested oprphanages never to be held or comforted. Where do their tears flow from? And the giving that ensues. I don't believe that that is founded in pride. Of course a Christian and non-Christian alike can give out of pride as well, but it isn't that one is always based in pride and the other isn't.

Many non-Christians(such as my parents) love out of a belief in a higher power, higher good that is mean't for all humanity. There is self sacrifice involved in their committment to that. I still don't see the examples given as the distinguishing factor.

~Shenaya~

ps. Springs, Thanks for the welcome.

Tom, I have the same questions you do, I'm glad you are asking them.

Edited by - Shenaya on 10/11/2002 9:43:41 PM

Iconoclast
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1227

Posted 10/11/2002 7:00 PM (GMT -6)

TGB

How do people reorient their lives from being “in the flesh” (which biblically is life outside of Christ) to being “in the Spirit”? What accomplishes this transformation?

Iconoclast

Love does.

Love is seeking someone else’s benefit at a cost to oneself. This is an act of “dying” to self. It is an act of dying to the flesh and living in the Spirit. This act NEVER takes place without Jesus.

When we love, in that moment, we are in unity with Christ, whether we know it as such or not.

There is only one issue: are we in unity with Christ or are we not. A muslim who loves IS in unity with Christ although he or she does not know it as such.

ALL love comes from God. God is the ground of our existence. To love IS to re-unite with God as our center, whether we know it as such or not.

We know that one can profess Christ’s name AND do all sorts of “spiritual” things AND good deeds BUT if it is not done in love then it is NOT of Christ. It is simply being done to reinforce oneself as one’s own center of being. It IS, in the name of Christ, a denial of Christ.

We also know that one can give a cup of water to a child or visit someone in prison out of love and THIS is the same to Jesus as giving Jesus a cup of water or visiting Jesus in prison. When we love others this is the same as loving Jesus. It IS, in the name of Love, an embracing of Christ.

Thus the muslim who loves others IS loving Jesus – even though they don’t know it as such.

And just imagine the muslim who loves like Mother Theresa. Imagine this person being confronted by a Christian who says that they must denounce their faith and confess Christ as lord. Why wouldn’t the meaning of this to them be that they must denounce THAT which is the basis for loving others and embrace an ideology that leads to the crusades. And if THIS was the actual meaning for this muslim why isn’t this to them a choice to denounce love and to take up the knowledge of good and evil? And if it IS, which one of us would want them to do this?

But, Iconoclast, if this is so then what is the value of being a Christian? How is Christianity any different than any other religion?

Shenaya

I think my parents could be used as an example here. They believe Jesus was one of many good teachers yet they embody what I view as outrageous love. They are constantly in giving mode, and believe in extending love to all individuals emphasizing the worth of all beings and support non-violence amongst humanity.

They walk the talk of their love. How could this change or be "improved" if they became Christians? It would help to get an answer to this question.

Iconoclast

I think it is always helpful to know the name of the one you love. To know that it is, in fact, the historical Jesus that is the one you love, that HE is the one at the center of your being, gives one a more concrete understanding of who He is. It allows one to have a deeper and more meaningful relationship with Him. Why? Because now one can actually visualize Him who we love on the cross loving us. We can hear His loving words to us. We can KNOW that we are totally and outrageously loved by Him. This is a significant benefit – even for a muslim who loves like Mother Theresa.

And when we feel more loved – when we are more filled up with His love then I think we are more able to love others. Which, of course, brings us more in unity with Christ, which, of course, helps us to feel more loved, which, of course, helps us to love others more, which …

If one comes across a muslim who loves like Mother Theresa, it seems to me that the primary objective would be to help that person come to understand that the love they have IS the love of Jesus. The goal would be to give them the gift of knowing the name of the one in whom they love.

TGB

Does the overall orientation of one’s life have anything to do with defining whether an act is considered by God to be “good” or “loving”? Hitler builds a school for orphans. Mother Theresa builds a school for orphans. These MUST be different acts.

Iconoclast

Good point. Love is the seeking of another’s benefit at a cost to oneself. It is really hard for me to see Hitler building a school for orphans for any other reason than to gain influence or power. It is also really hard for me to see Mother Theresa building a school for orphans for any other reason than to help the orphans.

At the same time, I do not doubt that it was possible for Hitler to do something for another at a cost to himself. And I would argue that, in that moment, there was a small ray of light, and thus hope, where God’s love touched Hitler’s heart, unfortunately it seems that Hitler rejected that touch in his next moment.

GODesteem brought up the following verses:

Gal 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.

To me this means that whether you DO all the things supposedly required to be saved doesn’t mean anything. Only faith working through (or “energized by”) love.

Rom 14:23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

In this context “faith” clearly means “acting on a belief”. It is saying that he who does not believe that it is OK to eat meat sacrificed to a pagan god and then goes ahead and eats it is condemned. Thus whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. To believe something and to then NOT act on it is sin.

1 Cor 10:31 Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

All that matters is faith (acting congruently with your beliefs) – faith that is “energized by” love. All that matters is acting congruently with your beliefs out of love. Yes. Do this in all things, eating, drinking or whatever, and you are doing it to the glory of God.

GODesteem

1 Tim 1:5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

How can an unbeliever ever love someone in an ultimate sense, "from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and a sincere faith"? Faith in what???

Iconoclast

Someone who only believes in themselves – someone who lives from themselves as their own source of life or center is surely incapable of loving someone else.

If this is what you mean by “unbeliever” then I agree.

But someone who actually loves others cannot possibly be an unbeliever in some “higher power” who is the source of love. And since faith is simply acting congruently on a belief then their faith is simply acting on the belief that there IS a higher power who is the source of love and that it is NOT them. That “higher power” is really God whether they know Him as such or not.

Starkman

I wonder if we shouldn't, then, carry over the concept of differentiating between that love of the Christian and that love of the non-Christian to include good deeds ("for by their fruit you will know them.") And what else can be included?

Can a non-Christian do good deeds within the same context of a Christian? I mean, is it just good deeds in general that Jesus meant when He said others would know us by them? Is there something different about a good deed of a Christian verses a good deed of a non-Christian? Is there something different about how a Christian loves verses how a non-Christain loves?

Iconoclast

Good point Starkman. Jesus says plain as day that a good tree CANNOT bear bad fruit and that a bad tree CANNOT bear good fruit. He also said that He is the vine and we are the branches AND that we will know them by their fruit! Thus, if someone is producing good loving fruit they must be a good tree, which is really a good branch, which is really connected to the vine of Jesus Christ – whether they know Him as such or not.

thanks,
Iconoclast

"The benefit overran the merit the first day, and has overrun the merit ever since. The merit itself, so-called, I reckon part of the receiving." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Edited by - Iconoclast on 10/12/2002 12:01:15 AM

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 10/11/2002 11:12 PM (GMT -6)

TGB: How do people reorient their lives from being “in the flesh” (which biblically is life outside of Christ) to being “in the Spirit”? What accomplishes this transformation?

Iconoclast: Love does. Love is seeking someone else’s benefit at a cost to oneself. This is an act of “dying” to self. It is an act of dying to the flesh and living in the Spirit. This act NEVER takes place without Jesus.

Tom: Right. So back to the question then. If such an act never takes place without Jesus, in what sense to those who are without Jesus love like this?

Iconoclast: When we love, in that moment, we are in unity with Christ, whether we know it as such or not.

Tom: I knew you were gonna say that! Rats. I knew it I knew it I knew it. Time for a new thread on the whole inclusivism/exclusivism debate. For the time being I'll argue from the other side of this fence.

Iconoclast: There is only one issue: are we in unity with Christ or are we not. A Muslim who loves IS in unity with Christ although he or she does not know it as such.

Tom: I feel like I’m on surer ground explaining the love unbelievers experience as a function and reflection of the image of God in them rather than applying Paul’s language to them and supposing them to be “in Christ” and “living the life of the Spirit” as atheists or Muslims. I know where you’re coming from, Bro. I'm just not there.

Iconoclast: ALL love comes from God. God is the ground of our existence. To love IS to re-unite with God as our center, whether we know it as such or not.

Tom: As I said, I’m more inclined to see love in unbelievers as a function/reflection of the image of God in them rather than a function/reflection of their being in Christ without knowing it.

Iconoclast: We know that one can profess Christ’s name AND do all sorts of “spiritual” things AND good deeds BUT if it is not done in love then it is NOT of Christ. It is simply being done to reinforce oneself as one’s own center of being. It IS, in the name of Christ, a denial of Christ.

Tom: Agree.

Iconoclast: We also know that one can give a cup of water to a child or visit someone in prison out of love and THIS is the same to Jesus as giving Jesus a cup of water or visiting Jesus in prison. When we love others this is the same as loving Jesus. It IS, in the name of Love, an embracing of Christ.

Tom: If we give the water “in my [Jesus'] name.”

Iconoclast: Thus the Muslim who loves others IS loving Jesus –even though they don’t know it as such.

Tom: Should I then just invest my time in helping Muslims be better, more loving, Muslims and not bother with attempting to get bogged down in talking about Jesus, and salvation through him, etc.? Just so that they know the name of the one they love? What if they reject the name and history of Christ? Are they still loving him without knowing it?

Iconoclast: And just imagine the Muslim who loves like Mother Theresa.

Tom: Haven’t met her. I’ve been out here a while. I know a LOT of different Muslim charitable societies and a bit about why Muslims give charitably of their money and time. It’s a religion of obligation and law.

Iconoclast: Imagine this person being confronted by a Christian who says that they must denounce their faith and confess Christ as lord. Why wouldn’t the meaning of this to them be that they must denounce THAT which is the basis for loving others and embrace an ideology that leads to the crusades

Tom: Like a said, you’ll look for some years before finding a Muslim Mother Theresa. Anyway, why suppose that the Christian/Muslim dialogue in this regard continue to be based on an interpretation of the Crusades that leaves the Muslim with an understanding of relating to Christ that amounts to embracing the Crusades?

Iconoclast: …then what is the value of being a Christian? How is Christianity any different than any other religion? ... I think it is always helpful to know the name of the one you love. To know that it is, in fact, the historical Jesus that is the one you love, that HE is the one at the center of your being, gives one a more concrete understanding of who He is. It allows one to have a deeper and more meaningful relationship with Him. Why? Because now one can actually visualize Him who we love on the cross loving us.

Tom: I understand exactly where your’re coming from. I’m not there. But I understand you.

Iconoclast: If one comes across a Muslim who loves like Mother Theresa, it seems to me that the primary objective would be to help that person come to understand that the love they have IS the love of Jesus. The goal would be to give them the gift of knowing the name of the one in whom they love.

Tom: Two things. One, I think you’re far more optimistic about Islam than I am. Secondly, what if Muslim Mother Theresa denounces Christ and his Cross?

Iconoclast: It is really hard for me to see Hitler building a school for orphans for any other reason than to gain influence or power. It is also really hard for me to see Mother Theresa building a school for orphans for any other reason than to help the orphans.

Tom: I’d agree and only add that what I know of Islam makes it difficult for me to imagine a Muslim Mother Theresa building a school for orphans without doing it out of “law.” You can imagine otherwise if you'd like, but I don't see it.

Iconoclast: In this context “faith” clearly means “acting on a belief.” It is saying that he who does not believe that it is OK to eat meat sacrificed to a pagan god and then goes ahead and eats it is condemned. Thus whatever does not proceed from faith is sin. To believe something and to then NOT act on it is sin.

Tom: Mephi, this is your cue. It’s time for you to sing here. You’ve hammered on this with me before. It’s really difficult to argue that for Paul “faith” was an impersonal force, that is, that it could be divorced from the knowledge of Christ.

Thanks Iconoclast! You’ve articulated an Inclusivist’s take on this particular subject. I’m not convinced, but it’s good to have that explanation clearly stated.

I want to add one more thing in response to, I think, Starkman's question about all this. I think we ought to understand Jesus' claim that others will know we're his followers by our love in the context of "community" and not so individualistically. It's not that we might not be able ocassinally to find examples of genuine self-sacrificial love outside of faith in Christ, it's whether or not atheistic, as a worldview, has as a matter of fact ever produced consistently loving community; whether Islam, as a worldview, has as a matter of fact ever produced consistently loving community. I've spent my whole life working among the three great monotheistic faiths, so I don't want to venture to claim much about the atheistic worldview, but with regard to Islam I think it's clear that Islam has not and does not produce self-sacrificial, loving, fruit of the Spirit community.

Are Christians sometimes less than loving? Yes. The question, it seems to me, is are Christians, by virtue of their faith in Christ, by virtue of the new birth, at least able to live otherwise? I think the answer is yes. And are people who have not experienced this new birth in Christ able to live otherwise? I think not. Iconoclast on the other hand answers with an Inclusivist argument and claims that being "in Christ," having one's life reoriented, as Paul says, from "flesh" to "the Spirit" can and does happens outside of any conscious embracing of Christ by name.

Tom

"Every saint has a history and every sinner a future." Oscar Wilde

Edited by - TGB on 10/12/2002 04:27:06 AM

Starkman
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747

Posted 10/12/2002 4:13 AM (GMT -6)

Tom, you hit upon the heart of the issue:

"So how are unbelievers suppose to know we are Christian “by our love”? I mean, what is this “different sphere than the world’s way of loving”? If love is the same accross the board, if our acts of love are perfectly paralleled by the world's, then how does the world deduce we’re Christians by OUR love?

Perhaps the don't "deduce" anything by our love, except that what we believe is worth listening to. My guess is that love, genuine love, IS God’s love. What other kind of love is there? Right?

So perhaps "love," in Jesus’ claim “they will know you are my followers by your love” is to be understood as a “confirmation” of and not the “indication” (I hope I explain this clearly) of the gospel we proclaim. That is, love and good works are not to be understood theologically apart from the mission of the Church to proclaim Christ. As we proclaim Christ, as we share his story with our neighbors and friends, our love, kindness, and good deeds testifies to the genuineness of our proclamation. No one single act of love, no series of acts of love in fact, can declare to the world that we are Christ’s apart from OUR declaring that we are Christ’s. Love comes in to confirm this."

To that part I put in bold, I say "Bingo!"
But let's look further at your posts, Tom.

Now you take what you've said above and you want to hone in on it, find the flaws, create the diamond that's supposed to be; excellent!:

"If doctrines and beliefs aren't what define us as followers of Christ, and if love is not what defines us as followers of Christ (because, as you say, all faiths love; nothing unique there) then pray tell...

...what DOES define us as followers of Christ?

It's not doctrinal.
It's not behavioral.
It's not in what we say.
It's no in what we do.

Where is it? And what is it? What DOES reveal to the world our identity as follower's of Christ?

Again, is there ANYTHING unique about what Christ is and does in us that has anything to do with love?"

You're now going to answer your own question , the very heart of the issue:

"Paul discusses the two main “orientations” of life as “life in the flesh” and “life in the Spirit.” Theologically, all that proceeds from a life oriented in the flesh is of the flesh, is not faith, and does not please God. If Paul himself would not admit that the love he described in 1 Cor. 13 is the heart and soul of a life oriented to the Spirit, then I don't know anything about Paul. (Let's NOT put that to a vote folks!)

How do people reorient their lives from being “in the flesh” (which biblically is life outside of Christ) to being “in the Spirit”? What accomplishes this transformation?"

Ah! And then you tossed in some garnish:

"I think we ought to understand Jesus' claim that others will know we're his followers by our love in the context of "community" and not so individualistically. It's not that we might not be able ocassinally to find examples of genuine self-sacrificial love outside of faith in Christ, it's whether or not atheistic, as a worldview, has as a matter of fact ever produced consistently loving community; whether Islam, as a worldview, has as a matter of fact ever produced consistently loving community. I've spent my whole life working among the three great monotheistic faiths, so I don't want to venture to claim much about the atheistic worldview, but with regard to Islam I think it's clear that Islam has not and does not produce self-sacrificial, loving, fruit of the Spirit community.

Are Christians sometimes less than loving? Yes. The question, it seems to me, is are Christians, by virtue of their faith in Christ, by virtue of the new birth, at least able to live otherwise? I think the answer is yes. And are people who have not experienced this new birth in Christ able to live otherwise? I think not. Iconoclast on the other hand answers with an Inclusivist argument and claims that being "in Christ," having one's life reoriented, as Paul says, from "flesh" to "the Spirit" can and does happens outside of any conscious embracing of Christ by name."

Now, with such thought-provoking posts, Tom, I'd like to comment on them.

First, in view of the fact that all peoples, faiths and cultures exhibit forms of love, there absolutely HAS to be something to demarcate a difference between general love (we being made in the image of God, being able to express something of that quality by loving), and the Christian's love; the first part of this post of which I put in bold starts the ball rolling. As Christians it's practically impossible to convey that we are Christians just because we love. It is possible that in some circumstances this may be captured--earth quake victims whose life or child's life, for example, is saved because a group of Christians go to that disaster area and provide relief. But anybody could have done this and done so with a heart of love, but we'll get to that in a moment. First things first: there must a ground work (that sphere) to start, or the Christian is just another loving person. It is first one of thelogical placement (as stiff as that may sound) that begins with RIGHTED relationship with God. Here's the starting point if nothing else is understood. So what transpires from this?

Second, You wanted to hone in on what all this means, so you asked the questions:

"...what DOES define us as followers of Christ?

It's not doctrinal.
It's not behavioral.
It's not in what we say.
It's no in what we do.

Where is it? And what is it? What DOES reveal to the world our identity as follower's of Christ?
Again, is there ANYTHING unique about what Christ is and does in us that has anything to do with love?"

Ah, but it's all of them, every last bit of them, understood first, however, that these items are to have a context: the person exhibiting them is to have A RIGHTED RELATIONSHIP with the Creator as foundation and framework (theologically and relationship wise.) for any of these items to convey their true meaning. If we do not first FRAME our concept of love and purpose in a proper, righted relationship with the Creator--which is EXACTLY what Jesus came to bring--then we would still be stuck with no demarcation to make sense out of why we even love in the first place!

It IS our doctrine, our behavior, what we say and what we do. It's all of these, but it's WHY we believe, behave, say and do these things: the Christian is in proper relationship with God, opening channels for the eternal purpose and meaning of all these things, MORE understanding of having been made in His image. The world is not in any postion to understand this merely because it loves, despite its ability to reflect something of the image of God.

Third, you made this all come together, Tom, when you noted Paul's theology as a qualifier: note Romans 8:9--"But you are not in the flesh (the world's sphere of existance with all its trappings and and abilities too) but in the Spirit (the new sphere where aligment with God brings tell-tale, fulfillment, purpose and meaning to life in doctrine, in behavior, in what we say, in what we do) IF the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, He is not His." (That last part is going to lead me to disagree with Iconoclast's concept that those who do good deeds out of a good heart are in unity with Christ. No, they are in more unity with humanity as expressed in the image of God, but they are not in any form of unity with Christ, unless we do not make a demarcation theologically and in relationship between Christianity and everything else. If that demarcation is not made, then all can claim to be in unity with God, but that's not what Scripture teaches.)

As Christians, we can more fully express what we are; made in the image of God. But to just express "more" of humanity's having been made in His image wouldn't be enough (hence Paul's statement about love in (Corinthians IN VIEW of his theology in Romans 8): Christians are translated out of the old (darkness) and put into the new (light--proper relationship with the Creator). This translation opens the door for the move of God's Spirit to work the heart of God through us to the world. THAT is going to be not just more love, or even a different kind of love, but confirmation and exhibition of the righted relationship being a reality--it really is true that one can come into relationship with the Creator. THAT'S our message, THAT'S what our love is all about. That's what makes the Christian expressing love something different than the world expressing love. The Christian points his love to the God who gave it; the world points its love to . . . themselves or a false god.

Now, one last thing . . .

Tom, you garnished your posts with this: "Are Christians sometimes less than loving? Yes. The question, it seems to me, is are Christians, by virtue of their faith in Christ, by virtue of the new birth, at least able to live otherwise? I think the answer is yes. And are people who have not experienced this new birth in Christ able to live otherwise? I think not."

There it is!
As a community of believers, we are in a place no one else is: we can love more fully, more completely, more in line with the heart of God!!! This is the byproduct, NOT the first reason for which Jesus came. He first came to make a way even possible between God and us. The results should be that the Christian community "says" something about this theologically in its lifestyle, in everything it does. But to get the lifestyle placed in first postion, as if that's the key to successful loving, is to put the cart before the horse. We will then be indistinguisable from the world.

Hope this contributes to the conversation,

Starkman

Edited by - Starkman on 10/12/2002 09:31:57 AM

54 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:26 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual