. . . in Jesus’ words: "The Kingdom of God does not come visibly. No one will say 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!'; because the Kingdom of God is within you.” - Luke 17.21

(an overly used quote by me. But I love that one)

I must be a fundie at heart

While science focuses primarily on the level of physicality, Christianity focuses on the ‘deeper’ level of spirituality, which eludes scientific weighing or measuring. I think that the Creationists and ID-adherents should refrain from trying to “prove” the Infinite via finite methods like materialistic science. They won't get anywhere. And as Neale Donald Walsch said, "If you don't go within, you go without." I believe that God can be found when we undergo an ‘inner transformation’ of the heart, rather than by appealing to traditional science.

May the force be with you......but may it be the Holy Spirit!!!

I must be a fundie at heart

There's always room for one more.....

I believe that God can be found when we undergo an ‘inner transformation’ of the heart, rather than by appealing to traditional science.

The quantum enthusiasts would differ here:they seem to think they are on the verge of poking through the infinitesimal via strings and discovering parallel dimensions. Now that's dealing with the invisible visibly.

in Jesus’ words: "The Kingdom of God does not come visibly. No one will say 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!'; because the Kingdom of God is within you.” - Luke 17.21

I'm wondering if you're thinking what I'm thinking on this verse.

Do you know when he says here in our version "within you" is better translated "among you?" Remember who he's talking to.

What Jesus was saying is the necessary elements of the kingdom were present and right in front of them and needed only to be recognized. It cannot mean "within you," for the kingdom certainly was completely unconnected with the Pharisees to whom he was speaking (v20). They did not have the spirit of God within them by any stretch. They hated him. See how they demanded to know when this kingdom was coming in v20.

When he said in v20 "The kingdom of God comes not with observation.....he's talking with an outward show like a political coup. Cuz look at v24...he says just like lightning so shall his coming be....it will be visible just not the way they envision it.

See that's what they were expecting....a political takeover....they wanted to be set free from Roman rule and they expected the Messiah to do so when he came. Jesus didn't seem to fit their ideal Messiah.

Happy New Year all!

The quantum enthusiasts would differ here:they seem to think they are on the verge of poking through the infinitesimal via strings and discovering parallel dimensions. Now that's dealing with the invisible visibly.

That’s very true. Traditional science is unable to discern whether God is “good”, or “love”, or not, however. It can’t prove or disprove whether God exists at all, in the sense of an all-knowing, omnipotent God.

Strings and parallel dimensions is an interesting field in science. I think that the parallel dimensions predicted by string theory renders plausible the existence of a Heavenly dimension. It will probably never be proved though, because if Heaven exists then it must exist in another realm or dimension. But I believe that human consciousness can detect God’s existence and the existence of Heaven, whether it be via intuition, or whatever you want to call it. This is what I mean by an ‘inner transformation’, which is really a transformation of consciousness. (There's a lot more depth to human consciousness than science has detected, I'm sure.) I personally adhere to Jospeh Benner’s words: “Spiritual growth results in an expansion of consciousness and opens up a new world, one of which previously the seeker had been wholly unaware, although it had always been present awaiting his recognition.”

This could all be summed up with the Christian phrase to be “born again”.

Do you know when he says here in our version "within you" is better translated "among you?" Remember who he's talking to. What Jesus was saying is the necessary elements of the kingdom were present and right in front of them and needed only to be recognized. It cannot mean "within you," for the kingdom certainly was completely unconnected with the Pharisees to whom he was speaking (v20). They did not have the spirit of God within them by any stretch. They hated him.

That’s an interesting view KFC. It comes down to personal interpretation again, however. What do you believe the Kingdom of God actually is, incidentally?

Even though you’ve concluded that “it cannot mean ‘within you’”, I believe that it can. I think that the Kingdom of God is akin to the realm of Spirit, where God is. During our time on earth, our connection with this realm - God’s Kingdom - resides within us. Jesus said that the Kingdom of God is right under our noses, and we don’t have to go anywhere to find it. My interpretation of Jesus' words is something like, “You won’t find it in the things of the world. It will come to you when you become born again and acknowledge it in your hearts.”

You’ll notice that the Bible’s reference to the Kingdom of God is orientated around spiritual matters, or ‘inner things’, (as well as existing 'up there and out there'. They don't have to be mutually exclusive.) St. Paul said, “For God's Kingdom is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of the righteousness, peace, and joy which the Holy Spirit gives.”

In Mark 4.11 Jesus says, “You have been given the secret to the Kingdom of God. But others, who are on the outside … may look and look, but not see; they may listen and listen, yet not understand. For if they did, they would turn to God, and He would heal them.” -

Here, I believe that “others on the outside” refers to those who have opted for a worldly interpretation of life. They look, but do not see. They listen, yet do not understand. They are caught up in worldly priorities and materialistic issues, and believe that the truth can be grasped by the intellect alone, rather than the intellect and the heart combined. They know all about the world, but they know nothing of God.

This all fits in with the issue of parallel dimensions and the spirit realm, too, I suppose.

What do you believe the Kingdom of God actually is, incidentally?

Actually I don't think we are too far different here.

The Kingdom of God is the sphere of God's dominion over all that belong to him. For now this rule is spiritual and manifested in the hearts of the believers. In the future it will be a literal earthly kingdom.

I think the definition you gave from Paul...Rom 14:17 is good.

The Kingdom in answer to the Phariblinds (my name for them) would come quietly and invisibly without fanfare that is associated with the arrival of a King. Christ was inaugurating a time that would bring the Kingdom rule to people's hearts thru Faith and not as was expected.

If not for the Jewish unbelief the earthly expected Messianic Kingdom would have been set up and established.

Because of Israel's rejection the kingdom still has not come and is yet future. God is today ruling thru the hearts of those who believe in Him.

But one day there will be a massive turning to God by Israel and then they will be restored. Then the Kingdom will come first in the form of the millennial reign of Christ (Rev 20) and then in its eternal form.

If you look at Acts 1:6 just before Jesus left to go back his disciples asked him if he was now going to restore the Kingdom to Israel. He told them it's not for them to know the time. Only God the father knows. So here we see that there will be a literal Kingdom and he did not discourage that hope.

So for now the Kingdom of God is manifested in the hearts of man but will someday be manifested here on the earth where Christ will rule physically. Some are thinking we're getting close.

So for now the Kingdom of God is manifested in the hearts of man but will someday be manifested here on the earth where Christ will rule physically. Some are thinking we're getting close.

This kingdom is but a shadow in the heart--surely not manifested; nor is it clear even among the faithful that Christ will rule physically; it is not in his character to rule, muchless return to this mess.

rather than the intellect and the heart combined. They know all about the world, but they know nothing of God.

Intellect does not preclude aspirations of what could or ought to be.

This kingdom is but a shadow in the heart--surely not manifested; nor is it clear even among the faithful that Christ will rule physically; it is not in his character to rule, muchless return to this mess.

Well first he's gonna clean up this mess before the rule....Rev 19 shows us a glimpse on this.

Not clear among the faithful? Who are the "faithful" who do not believe in this? The prophecies of the OT all point to this fact and was what was expected when he came the first time. The one who was fit to sit on the throne of David.

Psalm 2 is an example: Ask of me and I shall give thee the heathen for your inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron you shall dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore O you kings; be instructed you judges of the earth. Compare to Rev 2:27 & 19:15.

Intellect does not preclude aspirations of what could or ought to be.

No, but it can be a stumbling block.

I'm disappointed that Leauki hasn't decided to support his assertion that this isn't "intelligence vs. randomness". I think it is crass when someone insults your intelligence, pretends you are less educated in subject than them, and then just waltzes away when you try and explain your point. I get this a lot when people talk about ID. They don't want to address ID, they want to address creationism, or the creationists that are twisting the concept of ID.

The fact is there were biologists who in the last few decades wanted to explore the idea that maybe this wasn't always random genetic change suiting or not suiting a species. That maybe there were ways that nature itself could steer these geneti variances in a way that beneficial change was more often manufactured. Not AFTER thousands of freak mutations occured, were tested by natural selection and discarded, but designing the changes themselves.

You want to call that the "hand of God", fine. You want to think our alien overseers do it? Fine. You want to consider that "life finds a way" like Jeff Goldblum in Jurrasic Park... that's good too. ID isn't about faith. ID study is about the hypothesis that genetic changes aren't necessarily random change, but that they may occur in a "designed fashion".

The "designer" isn't really any more important to ID than the "creator" is to evolution. People like Leauki just fixate on Christians that want to hijack it, and in so doing help out scientific cronyism that wants to label any new idea that might possibly threaten their status. ATHEIST researchers that want to explore new areas have to combat the Pat Robertson stigma any time they question whether our evolutionary genetic leaps might not be so random.

Fek it, I'm just going to write up something on it I guess. Then instead of fighting like this with people who want to hit-and-run, I can just post a link and thumb my nose...

The fact is there were biologists who in the last few decades wanted to explore the idea that maybe this wasn't always random genetic change suiting or not suiting a species. That maybe there were ways that nature itself could steer these geneti variances in a way that beneficial change was more often manufactured. Not AFTER thousands of freak mutations occured, were tested by natural selection and discarded, but designing the changes themselves. You want to call that the "hand of God", fine. You want to think our alien overseers do it? Fine. You want to consider that "life finds a way" like Jeff Goldblum in Jurrasic Park... that's good too. ID isn't about faith. ID study is about the hypothesis that genetic changes aren't necessarily random change, but that they may occur in a "designed fashion".

Science is now discovering that nature’s evolution is a lot more fluid and organic than the crude ‘brick-yard’ processes that traditional evolutionists first described. Books like ‘The Origins of Order’ by Stuart Kauffman, and ‘The Web of Life’ by Fritjof Capra, describe how nature’s potential for design and complexity is already present in the self-ordering of atomic entities, in the same way that it is present in the self-ordering of crystals, snowflakes etc.

In this sense, I agree with BakerStreet that nature unfolds in a “designed fashion”, and that “nature itself could steer these genetic variances in a way that beneficial change was more often manufactured.” But I don’t believe that there is any need for external intervention, whether it be from God or from aliens, in order for “gaps” to be filled. I believe that in time, appeals to the God of the gaps, and to ID itself, will become obsolete and considered antiquated. But in the meantime it makes for some good discussion and some interesting theories.

Nature’s self-creativity and autonomy actually sits well with the Christian concept of God. The Bible teaches us that “God is love”. It is true that love does not manipulate, control, cling or coerce. Rather, it provides the beloved with opportunities for growth, creativity and freedom.

Freedom is bestowed upon the beloved, in this case Creation, as a necessary act of love. I believe that God chooses to renounce all manipulative control by endowing Creation with self-creativity and autonomy. For God to let the cosmos ‘be’ does not mean a withdrawal. Rather, God’s Spirit underlies Creation, and intimately bonds with its natural processes at a deeper level. The divine Spirit sustains and inspires all cosmic creativity, and intimately participates in the long journey of life. Whilst God permits nature to evolve in a self-creative way, God’s Spirit underlies the whole cosmic process and empowers nature’s unfolding from within.

(The Bible describes God as the Creator and loving Father of all, whose Spirit underlies the whole universe and transcends Creation. God’s Spirit not only exists ‘up there and out there’, but is also the Ground of Being. I believe that this concept deepens our understanding of the Creator’s relationship with Creation. God is the Source and inspirer of all cosmic creativity, in the sense that without His divine sustenance and informing intelligence, nothing could exist, or evolve, at all.)

The element of freedom in Creation could also explain the suffering, pain and tragedy occuring throughout life’s evolution. Due to the risks and vulnerabilities of love’s ‘letting go’, we ought not be surprised to find suffering and tragedy occurring throughout life’s unfolding and growth. (The existence of suffering can be understood and experienced even at the human level of self-giving love.) However, the suffering involved in nature actually enriches Christian faith, because divine suffering is central to Christianity.

In the words of John F. Haught: “In the symbol of the cross, Christian belief discovers a God who participates fully in the world’s struggle and pain. ... Reflection on the Darwinian world can lead us to contemplate more explicitly the mystery of God as it is made manifest in the story of life’s suffering, the epitome of which lies for Christians in the crucifixion of Jesus. ... Christian faith provides us with an image of God that is not only logically consistent with but also fruitfully illuminative of the Darwinian picture of life.”

Christ’s crucifixion clearly demonstrated that love hurts.

(I hope Steven doesn’t mind, as this is his thread, but I need to put a copyright on this as I’ve lifted some of it from my book.) Copyright © 2006 Andrew Baker All rights reserved. January 2, 2006.

This kingdom is but a shadow in the heart--surely not manifested; nor is it clear even among the faithful that Christ will rule physically; it is not in his character to rule, muchless return to this mess.

Not clear among the faithful? Who are the "faithful" who do not believe in this? The prophecies of the OT all point to this fact and was what was expected when he came the first time. The one who was fit to sit on the throne of David.

I’m sure many of the Bible’s great revelations describe spiritual truths and cosmic occurrences that relate to the Heavenly realm. Revelations chapter 19, for example, which you referred to, begins: “I heard what sounded like the roar of a large crowd of people in Heaven ...”

To me, this sets the scene in Heaven. Incidentally, when Pilate asked Jesus “Are you a King?”, Jesus replied, “My Kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18.33-36).

I don’t believe that upon Christ’s second coming, He will stay here and rule physically on earth. Our puny human minds naturally can’t comprehend many of the deep spiritual truths that Christian revelation strives to express. Earthly symbols and worldly expressions are therefore often used in the Bible, particularly in the book of Revelations. Fundamentalists, however, seem to have a habit of interpreting these verses literally.

Genesis and Revelation are the two most attacked books in the bible. One is detailing our beginning and the other our ending.

FKC, you’ve referred to Genesis and Revelations in the same sentence more than once. Most Christians have concluded that Revelations contains mostly metaphorical and allegorical verses. Should we not also conclude the same about Genesis – at least chapters 1 and 2 which document our beginning?

The "designer" isn't really any more important to ID than the "creator" is to evolution

One of the biggest logical problems facing adherents of ID, especially Christians and other theists, is the reality of suffering and tragedy occurring within living systems, and in nature. We've all seen TV documentaries showing how living creatures eat other creatures, or are eaten themselves, in their struggle to survive in the world. But furthermore, some of the biological 'flaws' in living systems are horrendous. If we believe that God is responsible for ID, in the sense of external manipulation, then we must either conclude that God is incompetent, or that He’s a sadist. I think that ID is more suited to people who believe that aliens are involved.

FKC

(sorry KFC, i meant KFC!!)

I don’t believe that upon Christ’s second coming, He will stay here and rule physically on earth

Well then Andy you haven't done your HW.

Jer: 23:5 says: Behold the days come says God that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch and a King shall reign and prosper and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

Isa 9:6-7: For unto us a child is born unto us a son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Basically saying here that the everlasting rule of Messiah on the throne of David awaits the second coming of Christ. This was written about 700 years before he was even born. We see alot of what you might call symboliic things come true in the OT and in the same way Christians expect the rest to come true in the second coming.

The Angel said to Mary: He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Highest and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David. And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Luke 1:32-33

This promise is not now being fulfilled simply because the church is not the house of Jacob and Christ is presently at the right hand of God which is never equated with the throne of David.

Fundamentalists, however, seem to have a habit of interpreting these verses literally.

Ya, that's a big problem now isn't it? Think I should stop that?

Most Christians have concluded that Revelations contains mostly metaphorical and allegorical verses

Hmmm how many is most? I don't know any personally that believe as you say. And I know alot of Christians. I do agree that's a belief out there. But only because if you allegorize something you can make it say what you want it to say. There's an agenda behind it. Do you have an agenda that warrents your belief to go in that direction?

So is the bible, allegorical? Is it literal? Yes. It's both. But in this instance it's very clear that He is coming back and HE is going to rule on this earth. It was also very clear in the OT that He would be born and HE would die. It was not symbolic...it was literal. It happened, it's history. Now we're just waiting for the rest of the story to happen. It will.

God said it, That settles it....and it doesn't matter if you or I believe it.

label any new idea that might possibly threaten their status.

As I've said many times before it is not a new idea; it is in the hijacking that has made it seem new.

However, the suffering involved in nature actually enriches Christian faith, because divine suffering is central to Christianity.

Nevertheless, it is arrant justification for sadism. I ask the same question as Ivan in Bros. K asked his brother. "Would you as God go ahead with creation if it meant the suffering of just one child?"

No, but it can be a stumbling block.

Are you denying the benefits of ehhanced thinking in order to make a better world?

However, the suffering involved in nature actually enriches Christian faith, because divine suffering is central to Christianity.

Nevertheless, it is arrant justification for sadism . . . "Would you as God go ahead with creation if it meant the suffering of just one child?"

I believe that a greater good will arise because of the existence of suffering, rather than in spite of it. If we believe in a God who is all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing, then we can rest assured that the final outcome is already assured – goodness will prevail, and a lot more wisdom will have been garnered in our souls because of the existence of pain and struggle.

When we arrive back in Heaven after death, I'm sure we'll see that if we had never been given the opportunity to experience the negativity of life on earth, then our souls would possess a lot less strength and wisdom. Pain and negativity can be used by the soul to promote growth and strength. I believe that painful experiences on earth turn into positive learning, and good fodder for the soul, at the end of the day, (i.e. in our eternal life in Heaven.)

God’s wisdom is infinite, and I'm sure He knows what He’s doing. I think the following insight from Denis Edwards is great: "God's omnipotence can be understood as God's capacity to enter into love with all its costs. Divine omnipotence is really the divine capacity for love beyond all human comprehension.”

All in all, it is only by eating the fruit of good and evil that we "become like God, knowing good and evil”, and can thus acquire the full scope of wisdom.

Fundamentalists, however, seem to have a habit of interpreting these verses literally.

Ya, that's a big problem now isn't it? Think I should stop that?

I believe that we can afford some healthy breathing space from extreme scriptural fundamentalism, FKC. Bear in mind you're talking to a bloke here who interprets the Garden of Eden in Genesis 2-3 as the Heavenly realm. It makes better sense to me, and it’s also written in the Qur’an, which I believe is also inspired by God. I don’t believe that Christianity holds a monopoly on the Truth. I've learned that when our world religions are merged, we find a better picture of Ultimate Reality. I’m more interested in the deeper, underlying messages of religious revelation.

We all have different points of view, though, and I don't expect other people to agree with me. I think that the key lies in finding peace with our own personal interpretations, and to not let other people’s views cause friction or annoyance. To keep an open mind to other people's views is healthy too.
We must accept that we all interpret the world and our Holy Scriptures through different ‘lenses’. If we can find inner peace, regardless of other people's behaviour or views, then we're on the road to mastery in life, in my view.

God said it, That settles it....and it doesn't matter if you or I believe it.

I agree with you. God said that Adam and Eve were created in Heaven, and I strongly believe it. He said it in the Qu'ran. As I've said before, if you had been born into a loving Muslim household, then I'm sure you'd believe it too. Many fundamentalist Muslims claim that Christians will perish in the Muslim-hell, however, just as many fundamentalist Christians claim that Muslims will perish in the Christian hell. But I think there's room for growth in the fundamentalist mindset.

Intellect does not preclude aspirations of what could or ought to be. No, but it can be a stumbling block.

Are you denying the benefits of ehhanced thinking in order to make a better world?

The intellect can become a stumbling block in the face of "the Infinite", (which, as you said earlier KFC, is really the Holy Spirit). When the intellects demands "proof" of God, then it becomes a stumbling block. But I think we can find a good balance. We can begin to live in a better world when we exercise the speandour of our mind and our heart's capacities. This too will enable us to get along better with our bro's and sisters. We're all God's children, after all