Why are you a Christian?

I think for me the real question is why did I remain a Christian. I became a Christian in college, but as a physics major who then went into geophysics in the oil industry where I saw geologic data that didn't match what my Christian friends were telling me about creation. That discrepancy between what I saw and what I was told was right sent me into a multi-year crisis of faith where I doubted everything I had believed about Christianity. The toughest question I faced was "If early Christians were as bad at observational data as are today's Christians, how can I believe the reports of the empty tomb?" Christianity, like it or not, is based upon the reports of the people who saw the empty tomb. There is nothing we can do to verify their report today.

I spent years discussing things with both atheists, conservative and liberal Christians. I even told my pastor son once that I was teetering on the edge of leaving Christianity. finally, I asked a prominent atheist professor, who prided himself on being able to convert Christians in his freshman class to atheism, to send me his best proof of atheism. He said he didn't have proof of atheism. I asked him what would make him change from atheist to Christian. Laughingly, he said, if he could see Jesus walked on the waters of Lake Cayuga (near his home) or parted those waters he would believe. That made me realize that if that happened, everyone would doubt his story and even after those events he himself would wonder if it had been a illusion/delusion and that made me realize even atheists live by faith.

This whole world is a moshpit of faith. The solipsistic view, that what we experience is always in the brain is a real philosophical problem that makes all of us live by faith that the external world is real. (as Alex Dumbledor said in the last Harry Potter movie "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?") Life, all lives are lived by faith. the real problem is what do we place our faith in? I put mine in Christ. Having read every major religion's founding book, there is no religion out there that explains this world and emphasizes faith like the Christian faith.

Gbob said:

I think for me the real question is why did I remain a Christian. I became a Christian in college, but as a physics major who then went into geophysics in the oil industry where I saw geologic data that didn't match what my Christian friends were telling me about creation. That discrepancy between what I saw and what I was told was right sent me into a multi-year crisis of faith where I doubted everything I had believed about Christianity. The toughest question I faced was "If early Christians were as bad at observational data as are today's Christians, how can I believe the reports of the empty tomb?" Christianity, like it or not, is based upon the reports of the people who saw the empty tomb. There is nothing we can do to verify their report today.

I spent years discussing things with both atheists, conservative and liberal Christians. I even told my pastor son once that I was teetering on the edge of leaving Christianity. finally, I asked a prominent atheist professor, who prided himself on being able to convert Christians in his freshman class to atheism, to send me his best proof of atheism. He said he didn't have proof of atheism. I asked him what would make him change from atheist to Christian. Laughingly, he said, if he could see Jesus walked on the waters of Lake Cayuga (near his home) or parted those waters he would believe. That made me realize that if that happened, everyone would doubt his story and even after those events he himself would wonder if it had been a illusion/delusion and that made me realize even atheists live by faith.

This whole world is a moshpit of faith. The solipsistic view, that what we experience is always in the brain is a real philosophical problem that makes all of us live by faith that the external world is real. (as Alex Dumbledor said in the last Harry Potter movie "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?") Life, all lives are lived by faith. the real problem is what do we place our faith in? I put mine in Christ. Having read every major religion's founding book, there is no religion out there that explains this world and emphasizes faith like the Christian faith.

Click to expand...

Could use your input here:

Charles Robert Darwin

Welcome to CF, by the way:

FORUMISTS

Gbob said:

I think for me the real question is why did I remain a Christian. I became a Christian in college, but as a physics major who then went into geophysics in the oil industry where I saw geologic data that didn't match what my Christian friends were telling me about creation. That discrepancy between what I saw and what I was told was right sent me into a multi-year crisis of faith where I doubted everything I had believed about Christianity. The toughest question I faced was "If early Christians were as bad at observational data as are today's Christians, how can I believe the reports of the empty tomb?" Christianity, like it or not, is based upon the reports of the people who saw the empty tomb. There is nothing we can do to verify their report today.

I spent years discussing things with both atheists, conservative and liberal Christians. I even told my pastor son once that I was teetering on the edge of leaving Christianity. finally, I asked a prominent atheist professor, who prided himself on being able to convert Christians in his freshman class to atheism, to send me his best proof of atheism. He said he didn't have proof of atheism. I asked him what would make him change from atheist to Christian. Laughingly, he said, if he could see Jesus walked on the waters of Lake Cayuga (near his home) or parted those waters he would believe. That made me realize that if that happened, everyone would doubt his story and even after those events he himself would wonder if it had been a illusion/delusion and that made me realize even atheists live by faith.

This whole world is a moshpit of faith. The solipsistic view, that what we experience is always in the brain is a real philosophical problem that makes all of us live by faith that the external world is real. (as Alex Dumbledor said in the last Harry Potter movie "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?") Life, all lives are lived by faith. the real problem is what do we place our faith in? I put mine in Christ. Having read every major religion's founding book, there is no religion out there that explains this world and emphasizes faith like the Christian faith.

Click to expand...

Our understanding of time is based on a variety of measurements which we have supposedly proven in the laboratory setting. However, if it were discovered that "time" was the single element we made a mistake with and in fact, "time" was actually more consistent with the biblical account of creation, then could the geophysical data still fit? In other words, If we took evolution of living creatures (especially humans) out of the equation and we determine that the time frame of all events was 10,000 years not 10,000,000 years is it still possible to fit everything we find in the cross section of events we can see?

A year to God is not the same as an traditional Earth year. It is much longer so it is not measured in traditional years.

marineimaging said:

Our understanding of time is based on a variety of measurements which we have supposedly proven in the laboratory setting. However, if it were discovered that "time" was the single element we made a mistake with and in fact, "time" was actually more consistent with the biblical account of creation, then could the geophysical data still fit? In other words, If we took evolution of living creatures (especially humans) out of the equation and we determine that the time frame of all events was 10,000 years not 10,000,000 years is it still possible to fit everything we find in the cross section of events we can see?

Click to expand...

Would there even be time without us here to observe and measure such? Maybe, we are inextricably linked with time...

Tone said:

Would there even be time without us here to observe and measure such? Maybe, we are inextricably linked with time...

Click to expand...

That would be somewhat chronocentristic as I read from your statement. I am talking about the history of geological evolution requiring the moving of time further and further back in order to fit the picture needed to lend support to biological evolution. It is the one factor that we must have in place for biological evolution to have a toe hold in support of our existence according to science. But if the methods we use to understand time have been wrongly interpreted and thereby incorrectly applied then can we move the time forward again to 10,000 years and still fit the geological image between the lines? (I refer to the physical components being able to fit without the biological being of concern for the moment?)

marineimaging said:

That would be somewhat chronocentristic as I read from your statement. I am talking about the history of geological evolution requiring the moving of time further and further back in order to fit the picture needed to lend support to biological evolution. It is the one factor that we must have in place for biological evolution to have a toe hold in support of our existence according to science. But if the methods we use to understand time have been wrongly interpreted and thereby incorrectly applied then can we move the time forward again to 10,000 years and still fit the geological image between the lines? (I refer to the physical components being able to fit without the biological being of concern for the moment?)

Click to expand...

Yeah, I have to brush up on any biology I have taken in the past, but it seems this thought could be a contribution here:

Charles Robert Darwin

Tone said:

Could use your input here:

Charles Robert Darwin

Welcome to CF, by the way:

FORUMISTS

Click to expand...

Well, my name is Charles Robert Watson. By some logic that authorizes the Son of Wat to challenge the idea of modern evolution of time on a Christian forum. Doesn't it. LOL

marineimaging said:

Our understanding of time is based on a variety of measurements which we have supposedly proven in the laboratory setting. However, if it were discovered that "time" was the single element we made a mistake with and in fact, "time" was actually more consistent with the biblical account of creation, then could the geophysical data still fit? In other words, If we took evolution of living creatures (especially humans) out of the equation and we determine that the time frame of all events was 10,000 years not 10,000,000 years is it still possible to fit everything we find in the cross section of events we can see?

Click to expand...

Look, I left the C/E area because data doesn't matter to anyone and imo in general the people arguing against YEC offer an unworkable solution to the problem so I am hesitant to even do what I am about to do.

The answer to your question is no. it won't fit. Consider the Haymond formation. The mathematics is highly problematical for fitting it into a YEC flood scenario

"Two thirds of the Haymond is composed of a repititious alternation of fine- and very fine-grained olive brown sandstone and black shale in beds from a millimeter to 5 cm thick. The formation is estimated to have more than 15,000 sandstone beds greater than 5 mm thick." p. 87.

"Tool-mark casts (chiefly groove casts), flute casts and flute-lineation casts are common current-formed sole marks. Trace fossils in the form of sand-filled burrows are present on every sandstone sole, but nearly absent within sandstone beds." Earle F. McBride,"Stratigraphy and Sedimentology of the Haymond Formation," in Earle F. McBride, Stratigraphy, Sedimentary Structures and Origin of Flysch and Pre-Flysch Rocks, Marathon Basin, Texas (Dallas: Dallas Geological Society, 1969), p. 87-88

Several items can be deduced from thes observations.

1. It is obvious that the burrowers prefer to burrow into the shale rather the sand.

2. The burrows in the shale were present when the sand was deposited. Why? because the sand filled the hole (burrow).

3. There were few burrows in the sand as there are no fingers of shale poking down into the sand as there are sand fingers poking down into the shale.

Lets try to explain this in a one year flood. Give each shale layer 1 day for recolonization of burrowers the deposit would require 41 years to be deposited. But that is a real problem. The Haymond bed is 1300 m thick and only represents a small part of the entire geologic column. All the fossiliferous sediments in this area are 5000 m in thickness. To do the entire column in one year requires 1300/5000*365=95 days for the time over which the Haymond must be deposited. This means that 157 sand/shale couplets per day must be deposited. That means that the burrowers must repopulate the shale 157 times per day, dig holes, be buried, then survive the burial to dig again another 156 times that day. Shoot, Sissyphus only had to roll the boulder uphill once a day. What on earth did these burrowers do to deserve this young-earth fate?

We know that the burrowers who were buried did not survive. If they had, they would have had to dig up through the sand to escape their entombment. There are no burrows going up through the sand. And if there had been these burrows, there should be little circular piles of sand with a central crater pocking the entire upper surface of the sand. We don't see these.

As we go east from the Marathon Mountains, these beds go deeper and deeper and are buried by Tertiary sediments which eventually reach 75,000 feet thickness in the region of the mouth of the Mississippi. Because the Haymond is buried by the Tertiary, we know that the Tertiary sediments of the Gulf are younger than the Haymond. Thus if the Tertiary sediment and the Haymond are flood deposits, then the Haymond may only have had less than a month for all that burrowing. Further almost every geologic layer in that 75000 foot pile of sediment has burrows, some have foot prints and some show signs of drying out--something that might take a week or more of exposure. So, no, YEC can't explain the geologic data.

I am finished debating C/E. Nothing is accomplished and much dishonor to the Lord comes from it (including my own occasional too sharp a response).

First, thank you for taking time to explain what you did. I hear your answer as no. Based on your own knowledge we cannot fit the events we see into the biblical time frame. As for arguing YEC or C/E or whatever. I had the honor of working as a PRA on the SSC at CU Boulder and sitting in meetings listening to Dr. Ford discuss various aspects of our experiments, yet I am not learned enough to know what geological findings ultimately embrace so I could not argue one over the other and would not intend to. It must be disturbing to know so much and yet have to rely on your simple faith in Jesus Christ as the only begotten son of God. One thing I did know as we continued the experiments up to the time of our closeout was that finding the Higgs boson wasn't going to be enough for most scientists. And therein lies the problem with searching for the beginning when the creator, God, has already revealed Himself. Man will never be satisfied because just like Adam who had it all, all is never enough.

Justified112 said:

That doesn't make you a Christian.

Click to expand...

It does if you have continued in the faith since your baptism. We can discuss OSAS and other questions in other threads, but I believe the person you're quoting is saying that they, like many others, has never not had faith.

I was raised in a Baptist church and those were the beliefs of my parents. After I got out of college, I was exposed to a lot of different views, some of which challenged the faith I had grown up with. So I began a journey to find the truth for myself. Through reading viewpoints of various atheists and Christians I landed back at Christianity. And my journey continues, not so much to reaffirm my faith, but to make me more proficient at talking to others. I'm a big fan of Thomistic philosophy, which is more or less where I've landed.

marineimaging said:

First, thank you for taking time to explain what you did. I hear your answer as no. Based on your own knowledge we cannot fit the events we see into the biblical time frame. As for arguing YEC or C/E or whatever. I had the honor of working as a PRA on the SSC at CU Boulder and sitting in meetings listening to Dr. Ford discuss various aspects of our experiments, yet I am not learned enough to know what geological findings ultimately embrace so I could not argue one over the other and would not intend to. It must be disturbing to know so much and yet have to rely on your simple faith in Jesus Christ as the only begotten son of God. One thing I did know as we continued the experiments up to the time of our closeout was that finding the Higgs boson wasn't going to be enough for most scientists. And therein lies the problem with searching for the beginning when the creator, God, has already revealed Himself. Man will never be satisfied because just like Adam who had it all, all is never enough.

Click to expand...

Agreed, I have just written a paper with a friend using quantum mechanics to show that dualism is real and materialism false based upon observational data. Physicists know this issue which is involved in the observer problem, but 99% of physicists are atheists. They want no immaterial souls floating around in the science labs or science books. lol. I think they are in for a surprise in the future life.

hedrick said:

It does if you have continued in the faith since your baptism. We can discuss OSAS and other questions in other threads, but I believe the person you're quoting is saying that they, like many others, has never not had faith.

Click to expand...

How can an infant have faith? How can a person have continued faith if they were baptized at an age where faith would not be possible? Being baptized as an infant doesn't make anyone a "Christian" in the biblical sense of the term.

Therein lies the problem; there is a difference between belonging to the Christian religion, vs. being a saved, born again follower of Jesus. Lots people are Christians in the sense that they culturally Christian; they participate in the external Christian community. But that isn't how the Bible defines who is a true believer. Each of us have to come to a place where we make a conscious decision to be born again. Jesus said in John 3 that we MUST be born again if we want to enter the Kingdom of God/Heaven. It isn't enough to simply be baptized or belong to the Christian religion. That won't get us to Heaven. Jesus, not baptism, is the only way to the Father.

Gbob said:

Agreed, I have just written a paper with a friend using quantum mechanics to show that dualism is real and materialism false based upon observational data. Physicists know this issue which is involved in the observer problem, but 99% of physicists are atheists. They want no immaterial souls floating around in the science labs or science books. lol. I think they are in for a surprise in the future life.

Click to expand...

Agreed. A lot of people are going to be in for a lot of surprises. As a point of conversation, until the stone was rolled away was Jesus alive or dead in the tomb? It can be argued that He was dead when he was put in therefore he was dead therein. But, was He made alive and the stone rolled away, or was the stone rolled away and then He became alive again? That seems to be a major concern to some folks.

Another is, according to the biblical teaching, answering the question of was He alive again..., or alive for the first time? Now, considering just those few questions what can we deduce about being a Christian?

In my book it doesn't matter nor does it need to be that complicated. Jesus was a real person and while alive witnesses recorded and testified to miracles. The man Jesus fulfilled ALL of the standing prophesies as the promised Messiah. He was crucified for my sins and resurrected fully alive to later ascend to sit at the right hand of God. That, in and of itself is sufficient for me.

Gbob said:

99% of physicists are atheists.

Click to expand...

More like 46%.
Scientists and Belief

hedrick said:

More like 46%.
Scientists and Belief

Click to expand...

Thank you for the correction. I will add that the of the top level famous physicists, the guys writing the textbooks, I know of none of them who believe in God.

Norman70 said:

My priority as a Christian is to do good works in this life, and I appreciate we do not have to be a Christian to do this. I accept that I will receive eternal salvation with God through faith alone. I trust that my motivation to do good works is by the Holy Spirit within me.
However I have a problem. In my old age and considerable infirmity I can only read, write and talk. I can give my possessions away, not money as I am poor apart from a couple of dollars here and there, and little in the way of time and energy. One poster here at CF has said that in retirement we should not be concerned about spreading knowledge of the Word (Jesus), but should only pray, fast, go to Church, and do some voluntary work if able. I do the first two but not able to do the second two.
My problem was highlighted as I read this morning's devotion sent by a Christian website. It attempted to encourage us, as Christians, to spread the Good News - knowledge of the Gospel. I can only read, write and talk, and it appears that my interpretation of the Scriptures is rather different to mainstream Christianity. All I can do is pray to God that in my reading, writing and talking this is what He wants me to do. At the moment He is saying: "Yes".

Click to expand...

In my opinion you are wise to choose to become active in ChristianForums..... they are a powerful open door that can give us a sense of accomplishment.

Rev 3:8

I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an opendoor, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

I don't even anymore why I bother I am sick of hearing it will get better.

YEAH, RIGHT! | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

Matisyahu8898 said:

Why are you a Christian?

Click to expand...

Because it is true. Unless someone can prove it untrue, I shall believe it.