• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Hard to title this post...

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I think we need to look at the tower of Babel and why God confused the languages. Because we still have a lot of subjective opinions. Everyone seems to have their own perspective and their own way of looking at things. People just do not understand each other a lot of the time. Some try more than others.
In terms of the Tower of Babel, have you looked into extra biblical historical texts?

There seems to be much surrounding the character Nimrod during that time of Babel, as well as Abraham.

Noah was alive on the Earth for 50 years at the same time as Abraham.

It would seem Abraham got much from Noah and his sons in terms of insight and faith and history.

And that is what extra biblical historical text say as well. But I had already started thinking about that when I did the genealogies and years.
 
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
In terms of the Tower of Babel, have you looked into extra biblical historical texts?
Sadam Hussain tried to rebuild the tower. The Bible says that the city will never be rebuilt. I have studied a lot of ancient history. More on Egypt and Ancient Mesopotamia. Not as much on the city of Babylon. There is already a lot of information and a lot of history about that in the Bible.
US_Soldiers_climbing_the_Ziggurat_of_Ur (1).jpg
 
  • Informative
Reactions: TreeStamp1
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Sadam Hussain tried to rebuild the tower. The Bible says that the city will never be rebuilt. I have studied a lot of ancient history. More on Egypt and Ancient Mesopotamia. Not as much on the city of Babylon. There is already a lot of information and a lot of history about that in the Bible.
View attachment 325070
Yes there is some information already in the Bible, but I look for extra biblical clarification for the same reason I read church history and church fathers about theology as well: there are so many modern viewpoints which use the same texts.

For example, Genesis 6 talks about the sons of God taking the daughters of men for wives. Some authorities balk at the idea of angels falling and taking wives before the flood. But that idea is all over extra biblical literature: Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Book of Jashar. One clear example of how modern thinkers are just plain wrong from religious and cultural presuppositions. You don't know what you don't know.

So for me the Bible is only "not enough" because there is so much confusion about what the Bible actually says and means. Sola scriptura is great idealistically. But protestants are all over the map, so the theory in practice it does not work. Plus the Scriptures themselves were decided by imperfect believers who were not always unanimous to be authoritative. Some viewed Enoch as valid. Some viewed the Apocalypse of Peter as valid. I am not talking heresy, but Deuterocanon stuff.
 
Upvote 0

JimR-OCDS

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love
Oct 28, 2008
19,636
4,237
The Kingdom of Heaven
Visit site
✟246,761.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
It sounds like you're looking for religion, not faith.

Faith comes from God alone, it is His gift to us. Faith is God's revelation of himself
to the individual, however that may happen.

Religion is the individual's response to the faith they have received from God.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: TreeStamp1
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,540
29,058
Pacific Northwest
✟813,256.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Hello everyone

I am a believer in the Judeo-Christian narrative. I am looking for sources of Christian "material/churches/groups/people" that would help me strengthen my faith, so to speak, the problem is I am very picky.

I am sort-of tired of "chewing the meat and spitting out the bones", and I would like to find a preacher/pastor/church/books/materials that I believe actually hold up accurately theology, following Jesus, loving others, humility, kindness, non-judgementalism, non-religiosity, authenticity, genuineness, biblical, supporting and prayerful for each other, etc. I know so many do seek this type of thing. I've to many good churches, which I am thankful for.

I was an atheist who believed evolution and had a NDE/OBE, became a theist and then researched science and religion, now believing we both did not come from evolution, and that Jesus is who he said he is, and rose from dead.

I absolutely am repulsed by "complete and exhaustive foreknowledge", and find some strain of "open theism" that supports a literal "free will" that can actually "surprise God" as refreshing and biblical.

I've done a lot of research in the past reading certain Early Church Fathers like Irenaeus, and books like the Shepherd, Enoch, Wisdom, etc.

I am tired of, and I really don't like going to, or watching online, churches who preach like inauthentic religulous people, or if they preach on topics that reveal their own theological compromise such as "evolution".

I want to respect them from a distance, but at the same time find people who want to be genuine and authentic and "real" believers, I don't know how else to put it, but also take God's word as the early church did, and Jesus. Like.... literally. Or symbolic literalism, regrading things like revelation. But not allegorical, such as what evolutionists would have to conclude.

If religulous works for some people, fine, I am happy for them. I consider them fortunate the have so many good things.

Anyone else have any of the same thoughts, or seeking something similar?

Maybe I am off, I am sorry if I am.

Just to list a couple preachers and authors who I have very much admired in the past: Derek Prince, Neil T Anderson, Nabeel Qureshi, Francis Chan.

Thanks for any responses

I am curious how you see "religiosity". As you mention not wanting that.

I feel like the best thing I can do here is simply provide my own personal story.

I was raised in a Christian home, namely Evangelical. My family attended a conservative non-denominational (non-Charismatic) church that simply identified itself as a "Bible church". It was my mom's childhood church, and it's where my parents met and got married. When I was eight years old my family was kicked out of the church because one of the church elders was having an affair, his then wife was friends with my mom in the choir, and he was able to divorce his wife and marry his mistress by accusing his wife of infidelity, accusing her of having a same-sex affair with my mom. The result was my mom being put under a kind of inquisition style situation where she was told she had to repent and then confess before the entire congregation (twice, once for each Sunday service, in front of thousands of people). Because my mom hadn't done anything wrong, and because she refused to humiliate and shame herself before thousands of people, my family was no longer welcome.

I'm forty years old now, and I would be lying if I said I don't still have some bitter feelings over what that elder--and that church--did to my mom and my family. It's something I am still working through as it pertains to forgiveness, because it left a very deep wound in my family. As, even after my mom passed away from cancer, I would still have people from that church come up to me and who believed all sorts of lies and gossips about my family. And it hurts when, after losing your mother, to have adults come up to you not to say, "Sorry to hear about your mom's passing" but "Sorry that your mom was a lesbian harlot".

Fortunately, after we left that church we found a welcoming congregation that was part of the Foursquare denomination, a Pentecostal denomination. At the time they didn't even have their own church building, and were using the local YMCA to meet on Sunday morning. It was a very small and very loving group of Christians who were there to help my mom, and the rest of us, heal.

However, after several years, we merged with another local Foursquare church one town over, and then a little while after that our pastor left because the higher-ups moved him out of state and we got another, younger pastor. Under the new pastor, and new leadership the things in that church began changing. By the time I was 18 years old, after my mom had passed and my dad had to move across the state because of his work, I no longer felt like I was part of it--though I was an active member in my youth group.

Also in my late teen years I had began to study Scripture more, and study the early Church Fathers, and started exploring other theological traditions within Christianity. I developed a hunger to learn more about Christianity. And that itself began to put me at odds with some of my own Christian friends. I remember at one point saying that I wanted to believe what Jesus' Apostles believed and to take seriously what they wrote and said in the New Testament--the response I got was surprising, that it shouldn't matter what the Apostles believed, instead it just mattered what the Bible said (surprising, because if I was to take the Bible seriously then that is the same thing, the Bible says what those who wrote it believed).

From the age of 18 and into my 20's I didn't have a church home. I visited a lot of churches. After moving to a new city, I continued to visit and explore, but I myself didn't know where to belong. I looked at a lot of different churches, for sometime I seriously considered the Charismatic Episcopalian Church. As I was, at the time, somewhere in-between still Charismatic/Pentecostal in some of my theology and also liturgical traditional. At the same time I was also looking at the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, because, again, I was interested in taking Jesus seriously, and therefore taking Christian history seriously.

In my early-mid 20's I eventually had a rather profound exchange with a Lutheran on an online discussion, on a forum similar to one like this. It was a rather simple expression of the Lutheran understanding of Justification. And it blew my mind, and I started looking into Lutheranism--which I hadn't really done before then.

What I haven't mentioned in any of this, was that throughout my life, ever since I was a very small child I struggled with the idea of my own salvation. I had been raised to believe that my salvation depended on my ability to make a sincere and genuine decision to believe and follow Jesus, and if that decision was sincere and genuine, then I could know I was truly saved. And, conversely, if I couldn't pinpoint a precise moment where I made a genuine decision for Jesus, then--maybe--maybe I wasn't saved at all.

At the age of almost four years old, my parents led me through the "Sinner's Prayer" and I "Asked Jesus into my heart". But I was four years old, and didn't fully grasp what was going on. When I was about eight years old, I was already having a crisis of faith, talking to my dad about how could I know if I "really meant it" when I asked Jesus into my heart. I was eight years old and unsure how to know how if I could "really mean" something. So my dad led me through the "Sinner's Prayer" again, just to make sure I meant it this time--but I still didn't know. And I didn't know how to know.

When I was twelve, a traveling evangelist came to my Pentecostal church, and I was one of several other kids my age who went up front to "receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in tongues". Like almost everyone else who went up, when the evangelist prayed and laid hands over me, I fell to the ground and began speaking in ecstatic utterances.

But I still didn't know if I "meant it" when I asked Jesus to be my personal Lord and Savior, and I was told that I should be showing evidences of a transformed and sanctified life--bearing fruit. And yet, I was now twelve years old and undergoing puberty, and my hormones and my brain were a total mess. It seemed like the more seriously I was trying to take my faith, the more unsure I was of it. It felt like the more I wanted to obey God, the more sinful I was. The more I desired God, the worse I seemed to be--and rather than leading me to comfort and peace with God, I was constantly afraid and terrified. Terrified that I was beyond redemption, terrified that I was rejected by God for my lack of faith and was destined to eternal torment in hell. That God could love others, but not me, I was beyond hope.

By the time I was sixteen years old I was active in my youth group. And I went on my first mission trip to help serve the homeless and work with a church in San Francisco doing outreach in the inner city. It was an important experience for me, and I grew a lot. I came back "on fire" for God. But peeling back the veil, I was still a scared child who was unable to shake the feeling that I was beyond redemption. I would, frequently, spend hours privately in my bedroom literally cry out to God while laying prostrate on my face--begging Him to make me holy, begging Him to save me, begging Him to make me better. And sometimes, sometimes I felt a little better, but then I would trip up again, and again feel like I was beyond hope. After all, why was I not seeing the fruits of holiness in my life? Why was I constantly struggling with the same things over and over?

And those feelings lingered in me into adulthood. So when, finally, in my 20's I had a Lutheran explain the Lutheran view of Justification, my mind was truly and thoroughly blown away. God could save me simply because He loved me and wanted to? I could be saved entirely apart from even myself, simply because Jesus lived, suffered, died, and rose again? It wasn't up to me to show God how much I loved Him, it was up to God to show me how much He loved me? These were mind-blowing ideas that fundamentally turned an entire lifetime of religious experiences on their head.

As such, I very frequently tell people that I stumbled backward, that I tripped and fell into Lutheranism entirely by accident. Lutheranism was never on my radar. Of all the churches I was exploring, Lutheranism just wasn't even in my peripheral vision. And then suddenly, as though struck by lightning, I suddenly wanted to know more about it. And what I discovered in the Lutheran tradition was truly radical. The more I learned, the more I read Scripture, the more things just seemed to click. But I was, at the same time, afraid to start going to a Lutheran church--what would my family think? After all, when I had first started studying Church history and theology, a lot of my Evangelical friends thought I was walking away from Jesus. When I left my home town I learned of rumors being spread about me, some pretty awful things--such as that I had become a drug dealer.

It took a few years, almost into my 30's, but I eventually did build up the courage to start attending a Lutheran church, accepting that even if there would be people who didn't like it, I had to follow my conscience, and that what I needed and wanted was to hear the Gospel being preached. I've never looked back since then.

The goal of me mentioning Lutheranism isn't to say "You should be Lutheran". The goal is simply to share some of my own personal experiences. I do believe that there is something uniquely special about the Lutheran tradition, but I don't feel comfortable simply telling someone "Be what I am". But I do encourage people to study theology, and to always be willing to challenge their own assumptions on matters of religion.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
It sounds like you're looking for religion, not faith.

Faith comes from God alone, it is His gift to us. Faith is God's revelation of himself
to the individual, however that may happen.

Religion is the individual's response to the faith they have received from God.
I had thought of it in the past as:

"With all your getting, get understanding" Proverbs 4:7 KJV
That's a question that'll never go out of style it seems. It's always relevant to our struggles to somehow get all the pieces to fit together.

In short, I think the various critiques of evolution are somewhat on the weak side where science is being fully engaged and those critiques end up being more a form of philosophical outlook upon the world than they are bona-fide discernments about the efficacy of the theory of evolution.

I know that may sound like a bummer, but just keep in mind that there are more than a handful of various perspectives on exactly what and how evolution works and the extent to which is can be held in juxtapostion with our faith in Christ and Sacred Scripture.

Just know that without getting into specifics, my view of this will be something that approximates that of Catholic geneticist, Francis Collins, rather than that of an atheist die-hard like Richard Dawkins. At the same time, being that I'm am existentialist, I'm not bothered if other fellow Christians feel they don't believe in evolution and want to hold to a more literal interpretation of God's World, particularly where Genesis 1-3 are concerned.

So, that's the short of my opinion, for whatever it's worth.


Peace!
Interesting. I was meaning, though, have you read into various critiques of evolution, like problems with the theory in general, from genetic mechanisms to chemical evolution? This statement is pretty general:

"In short, I think the various critiques of evolution are somewhat on the weak side where science is being fully engaged and those critiques end up being more a form of philosophical outlook upon the world than they are bona-fide discernments about the efficacy of the theory of evolution. "

At first when I became a theist after my NDE/OBE, I bought/downloaded over 40 creationist lectures from Creation.com and was extremely surprised at how so many of my scientific questions about origins (from biology to geology to cosmology) have actual answers, since I had been taught evolution as fact in high school and college ( I have a Chem B.S.).

Later, when I heard Dawkins tell his childhood story about his questions to his clergy about how "evolution fits with the Bible" and got the answer "Nice boys don't ask such questions", which led him to atheism, I thought to myself, "if only he knew then, what I know now", being a former atheist myself and having a flurry of questions, knowing evolution does not fit with the biblical narrative, which Dawkins also saw clearly.

Although I believe Collins is wrong about evolution (or large scale type), I loved seeing him talk with Dawkins on Unbelievable channel YT.

But after having a creationist basis for the critiques of secular theories of origins, since that would be a plain reading of the texts and my NDE/OBE was very powerful me to be initially inclined to take the Bible as the Word of God which I heard so much about from preachers, I then, more recently, was interested in seeing what fringe or even non-Christian critics of evolution have to say about its problems, so that I could conclude its not a completely biased situation in that evolutionary theory is a fairy tale.

So the likes of Intelligent Design, Discovery Institute, people like Michael Behe, David Berlinski, David Gelernter, and Stephen Meyer willing to put their necks out to show that there are serious issues with the theory of evolution.

Then looking into actual secular origins academic research like Dr. Richard E. Lenski's bacteria experiments, where the overall genetic fitness went down, but mutations did provide a gain of function. Same thing with penicillin resistance, mutations are downward direction, but can provide gain of function. It is this decay or downward direction of evolutionary change that really hits at the theories inability to create complex structures, body plans, regulation, developmental biology, new organ systems, etc. The micro evolution side of things, like dogs being bread into so many different looking dogs, is just differential reproduction, a unique spreading out of genes which were already there, but potentially providing some advantage like long hair in colder climates.

Another secular origins researcher, Dr Lee Cronin, really was lacking anything significant as well, like Dr Lenski was, although Cronin was extremely optimistic even to the point of having faith he will find how evolution can actually do it someday, on the Unbelievable Channel as well.

Also, personally, its not that I don't want to believe evolution since I already used to believe it, but having being convinced of theism and the Biblical witness, I knew intellectually it did not fit. Otherwise we would have to conclude that Jesus and Paul did not know what they were talking about when they quoted Genesis.

Have you heard these arguments?
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,540
29,058
Pacific Northwest
✟813,256.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I had thought of it in the past as:

"With all your getting, get understanding" Proverbs 4:7 KJV

Interesting. I was meaning, though, have you read into various critiques of evolution, like problems with the theory in general, from genetic mechanisms to chemical evolution? This statement is pretty general:

"In short, I think the various critiques of evolution are somewhat on the weak side where science is being fully engaged and those critiques end up being more a form of philosophical outlook upon the world than they are bona-fide discernments about the efficacy of the theory of evolution. "

At first when I became a theist after my NDE/OBE, I bought/downloaded over 40 creationist lectures from Creation.com and was extremely surprised at how so many of my scientific questions about origins (from biology to geology to cosmology) have actual answers, since I had been taught evolution as fact in high school and college ( I have a Chem B.S.).

Later, when I heard Dawkins tell his childhood story about his questions to his clergy about how "evolution fits with the Bible" and got the answer "Nice boys don't ask such questions", which led him to atheism, I thought to myself, "if only he knew then, what I know now", being a former atheist myself and having a flurry of questions, knowing evolution does not fit with the biblical narrative, which Dawkins also saw clearly.

Although I believe Collins is wrong about evolution (or large scale type), I loved seeing him talk with Dawkins on Unbelievable channel YT.

But after having a creationist basis for the critiques of secular theories of origins, since that would be a plain reading of the texts and my NDE/OBE was very powerful me to be initially inclined to take the Bible as the Word of God which I heard so much about from preachers, I then, more recently, was interested in seeing what fringe or even non-Christian critics of evolution have to say about its problems, so that I could conclude its not a completely biased situation in that evolutionary theory is a fairy tale.

So the likes of Intelligent Design, Discovery Institute, people like Michael Behe, David Berlinski, David Gelernter, and Stephen Meyer willing to put their necks out to show that there are serious issues with the theory of evolution.

Then looking into actual secular origins academic research like Dr. Richard E. Lenski's bacteria experiments, where the overall genetic fitness went down, but mutations did provide a gain of function. Same thing with penicillin resistance, mutations are downward direction, but can provide gain of function. It is this decay or downward direction of evolutionary change that really hits at the theories inability to create complex structures, body plans, regulation, developmental biology, new organ systems, etc. The micro evolution side of things, like dogs being bread into so many different looking dogs, is just differential reproduction, a unique spreading out of genes which were already there, but potentially providing some advantage like long hair in colder climates.

Another secular origins researcher, Dr Lee Cronin, really was lacking anything significant as well, like Dr Lenski was, although Cronin was extremely optimistic even to the point of having faith he will find how evolution can actually do it someday, on the Unbelievable Channel as well.

Also, personally, its not that I don't want to believe evolution since I already used to believe it, but having being convinced of theism and the Biblical witness, I knew intellectually it did not fit. Otherwise we would have to conclude that Jesus and Paul did not know what they were talking about when they quoted Genesis.

Have you heard these arguments?

As far as evolution is concerned. Lots of devout, Bible-believing Christians accept the theory of evolution, without concluding that Jesus or Paul were wrong when they quote Genesis. One significant example is Dr. Francis Collins, a leading expert on genetics who was head of the Human Genome Project back in the 2000's, a co-founder of the BioLogos Foundation, a Christian think tank that deals in the intersection of faith and science; and who is also a life-long devout Evangelical Christian. Other notable examples of devout Christian theologians, clergy, scholars with strong scientific backgrounds include John Polkinghorne and Alister McGrath.

Historically, a literal interpretation of the creation stories in Genesis has never been viewed as mark of Christian orthodoxy, with Christians being of many diverse opinions. Early Christian thinkers such as Origen of Alexandria and St. Augustine of Hippo represent non-literal positions. We can also include Thomas Aquinas, the father of medieval western Christian Scholasticism.

Before and during the time of Charles Darwin, many leading experts in the fields of geology and biology were Christian clergy. And by the time of Darwin there was already a solid consensus that the earth was old. Old Earth Creationism, in fact, was the standard model for many Christians in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Even among the opponents of the theory of evolution. It isn't until the mid-20th century that we begin to see, among Fundamentalists, the rise and growing predominance of Young Earth Creationism. There were, of course, Young Earth Creationists for centuries, including antiquity. But its rise as tenet of faith, rather than merely an opinion, is something the arose rather uniquely within the American Fundamentalist and Evangelical traditions of the mid-20th century. Prior to which Fundamentalists had often been proponents of Old Earth Creationism. And among Catholic and Mainline Protestants, there had been a significant tolerance, if not outright acceptance, of the theory of evolution for quite some time. Most mainstream churches made the issue of evolution a matter of personal conscience, rather than a matter of dogma. What was to be held as dogma being the historic dogmas of the Christian faith, rather than specific opinions on interpretation or science.

Speaking personally, I absolutely and unquestioningly believe in the divine inspiration, and in the total infallibility, of Holy Scripture. I also accept the theory of evolution. I believe the words of Christ and the words of St. Paul in the Scriptures to be absolute and infallible. But I don't see any conflict between what is said in Scripture and what science has uncovered as it pertains to the evolution of life and the antiquity of the earth. These are not things I view as being in conflict. There may be questions raised that don't have perfect answers, but there are many questions about matters of faith that lack perfect answers. The Christian religion, and indeed Holy Scripture itself, is full of mysteries and often paradoxes which we have to simply embrace with faith. The historic Christian faith has always embraced such mystery and the reality of the paradoxical.

For example, how can Christ, who is True God, and who therefore knows all things not know the day and hour of His own return? Many attempt to answer this, but frequently in so doing end up denying the doctrine of the Incarnation, or rejecting some other aspect of historic Christian orthodoxy. Because the only answer we truly have is that we don't know. Somehow, in the Incarnation, God the Son who knows all things yet doesn't know this thing. How can this be? Yet that is what we read and therefore confess. The all-knowing, eternal, and infinite God, the only-begotten Son of the Father, says only the Father knows, and so it is. We, likewise, confess that the eternal and all-powerful God, the only-begotten Son of the Father, who cannot suffer nor die for He is Immortal and Infinite, nevertheless suffered and died under Pontius Pilate. God's own blood is what purchased His Church (Acts 20:28).

We are therefore constrained to confess what is revealed, even if we will always be without all answers. Especially on this side of the Eschaton. We abide in and walk by faith. It is not easy, it is hard; it is very often a cross that we must bear as part of our invitation to follow Jesus.

-CryptoLutheran
 
David's Harp
David's Harp
There's joy and freedom in being able to say "I don't know", and leave it at that. Praise be to God that He can take the burden of the quest for knowledge from us.
Upvote 0
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,714
11,551
Space Mountain!
✟1,364,204.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Interesting. I was meaning, though, have you read into various critiques of evolution, like problems with the theory in general, from genetic mechanisms to chemical evolution? This statement is pretty general:
"In short, I think the various critiques of evolution are somewhat on the weak side where science is being fully engaged and those critiques end up being more a form of philosophical outlook upon the world than they are bona-fide discernments about the efficacy of the theory of evolution. "​
Yes, my statement was general because I've probably only studied maybe--oh, I don't know for sure---my 40% of the problems brought up by various Christians who present critiques of Evolution. :sorry: Maybe the percentage is a little higher, but I like to dampen my estimation so as not to overplay my actual engagement with the issues involved. I know I'm no expert on the subject of Evolution; I'm just an ongoing, general researcher really.

At first when I became a theist after my NDE/OBE, I bought/downloaded over 40 creationist lectures from Creation.com and was extremely surprised at how so many of my scientific questions about origins (from biology to geology to cosmology) have actual answers, since I had been taught evolution as fact in high school and college ( I have a Chem B.S.).
Ok. You're a science student, of Chem even. I very much respect that, and I'm sure you could fill me in on a lot of good info. I, unfortunately, am not a hard science graduate, but I like to learn since I'm always open to further education. I will say that when I attended bible college years ago, one of the classes I took was on the Creation vs. Evolution issue and our main textbook was "Creation Science" by Dr. Henry Morris and Dr. Gary Parker. That was the first time in my life I had ever heard about any alternative, even biblical ways of looking at the world in a science related fashion. It was interesting for sure, especially when I had to write a paper using Creation Science and argue against another book we read by Niles Eldridge.
Later, when I heard Dawkins tell his childhood story about his questions to his clergy about how "evolution fits with the Bible" and got the answer "Nice boys don't ask such questions", which led him to atheism, I thought to myself, "if only he knew then, what I know now", being a former atheist myself and having a flurry of questions, knowing evolution does not fit with the biblical narrative, which Dawkins also saw clearly.
Yes, I've heard a lot of Dawkins and red some of his stuff, along with Jerry Coyne. And you and he are definitely right to say that evolution does not fit with the biblical narrative. I've known that too, even since I became a Christian. In fact, for me, I've always known and it has been an issue that is a hard nut to crack, that's for sure.
Although I believe Collins is wrong about evolution (or large scale type), I loved seeing him talk with Dawkins on Unbelievable channel YT.
Yeah, I saw that episode of Unbelievable not so along ago as well. And other than a few comments on covid vaccines, there wasn't much that was new said by either Collins or Dawkins in that, but it was good to see them chatting together.
But after having a creationist basis for the critiques of secular theories of origins, since that would be a plain reading of the texts and my NDE/OBE was very powerful me to be initially inclined to take the Bible as the Word of God which I heard so much about from preachers, I then, more recently, was interested in seeing what fringe or even non-Christian critics of evolution have to say about its problems, so that I could conclude its not a completely biased situation in that evolutionary theory is a fairy tale.
Well, that's certainly a noble and fair-minded approach. Not everyone is willing to do that and expose themselves academically or intelligently to other points of view, especially on tough topics that carry a lot of weight for our decisions.
So the likes of Intelligent Design, Discovery Institute, people like Michael Behe, David Berlinski, David Gelernter, and Stephen Meyer willing to put their necks out to show that there are serious issues with the theory of evolution.
Yes, I'm familiar with a couple of those names, and they've done some interestng work as well, with Behe and Meyer being the two that I've read in the past. As for Berlinski, is he still an atheist? I haven't checked lately but I have his book, The Devil's Delusion, and it's a good read too.
Then looking into actual secular origins academic research like Dr. Richard E. Lenski's bacteria experiments, where the overall genetic fitness went down, but mutations did provide a gain of function. Same thing with penicillin resistance, mutations are downward direction, but can provide gain of function. It is this decay or downward direction of evolutionary change that really hits at the theories inability to create complex structures, body plans, regulation, developmental biology, new organ systems, etc. The micro evolution side of things, like dogs being bread into so many different looking dogs, is just differential reproduction, a unique spreading out of genes which were already there, but potentially providing some advantage like long hair in colder climates.
Nope. I haven't heard about Lenski, and with you sharing him here I'm kind of perked to find out some more. I have a lot of literature myself, but it's always good to get additional names and angles to add to the weight of the info on all sides.
Another secular origins researcher, Dr Lee Cronin, really was lacking anything significant as well, like Dr Lenski was, although Cronin was extremely optimistic even to the point of having faith he will find how evolution can actually do it someday, on the Unbelievable Channel as well.
Ok. I haven't heard about Dr. Cronin either. I'll have to check him out too, soon. Thanks for that ref!
Also, personally, its not that I don't want to believe evolution since I already used to believe it, but having being convinced of theism and the Biblical witness, I knew intellectually it did not fit. Otherwise we would have to conclude that Jesus and Paul did not know what they were talking about when they quoted Genesis.

Have you heard these arguments?
Oh, yes, I've hard those arguments. In fact, I even came up with them myself on my own when reading the Bible for the first time back when I initially found Christ. I wasn't surprised, really, being that I was already in the evolutionary camp in my thinking, but I thought that finding what there was an ill-fit and inconsistency in all of that, it made it doubly difficult to think through (at that time).

On my own part, being that I'm an existentialist as well and a Christian, I have essentially no desire to persuade any fellow Christian about whether evolution is true or not or historically accurate or not. All I really care about is whether they know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, so I don't press the issue. What's more, I don't think the evolution vs. creationism issue is the actual core issue. It does get much of the media attention and lobbying on both sides, but I think the real issues are other than this. So for me, evolution is a tertiary concer, even when it is a scientific and also philosophical locus of inquiry.

Where does the E vs. C debate rank on your spiritual or intellectual priority list now that you're a Christian, TreeStamp?
 
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
It sounds like you're looking for religion, not faith.

Faith comes from God alone, it is His gift to us. Faith is God's revelation of himself
to the individual, however that may happen.

Religion is the individual's response to the faith they have received from God.
hey JimR-OCDS:

Your distinction between faith and religion is interesting to me.

It seems like God is more concerned with faith and morality in the individual than theology.

The gold standard 10 commandments emphasize the One God, no idols, and the various, most important moral laws.

And God seems to judge people/nations based on these moral laws.

But God does not seem to judge people on their various theologies. I know it may seem strange to talk about judging false theologies =) , but I am only trying to describe what I have noticed.

God does not care too much about the various theologies out there, but about faith, morality and how we treat others. I think that is totally fine and all, but I do think the non-unity of theology and understanding is actually very damaging to the church, the witness to others, and the spiritual health of the believers. My own personal belief, I may be wrong of course.

This may not be at all what you were talking about, but it made me think about something that has been bouncing around my head for years.

Please elaborate more though if you would.

If Faith is a gift of God's revelation of himself to us, then how are we to understand this God, except trying to grasp what the texts means? So we now know God exists, but what kind of God is He, what does he want? What is right, what is wrong? How are we to view Him, to view ourselves? Should we shudder in fear everyday knowing this all powerful God exists? Or should be bask in the warm love we now know exists towards us? Different faith traditions would answer these questions differently. I know the text says the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth. But what if you don't have a Bible. Or what if the Bible is interpreted wrong and you believe the person who tells you that. Like Paul talking about the Judiazers. Humans can usually be misled and misdirected very quickly and easily.

Does not our response (religion) to the Faith we have receive depend on our understanding about the situation? But what if we have Faith now, but our understanding is off for whatever reason?

Basically, my question comes down to understanding. If we now know God exists because he gave us the gift of faith, what kind of understanding of this new situation should we have?
 
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Yes, my statement was general because I've probably only studied maybe--oh, I don't know for sure---my 40% of the problems brought up by various Christians who present critiques of Evolution. :sorry: Maybe the percentage is a little higher, but I like to dampen my estimation so as not to overplay my actual engagement with the issues involved. I know I'm no expert on the subject of Evolution; I'm just an ongoing, general researcher really.


Ok. You're a science student, of Chem even. I very much respect that, and I'm sure you could fill me in on a lot of good info. I, unfortunately, am not a hard science graduate, but I like to learn since I'm always open to further education. I will say that when I attended bible college years ago, one of the classes I took was on the Creation vs. Evolution issue and our main textbook was "Creation Science" by Dr. Henry Morris and Dr. Gary Parker. That was the first time in my life I had ever heard about any alternative, even biblical ways of looking at the world in a science related fashion. It was interesting for sure, especially when I had to write a paper using Creation Science and argue against another book we read by Niles Eldridge.

Yes, I've heard a lot of Dawkins and red some of his stuff, along with Jerry Coyne. And you and he are definitely right to say that evolution does not fit with the biblical narrative. I've known that too, even since I became a Christian. In fact, for me, I've always known and it has been an issue that is a hard nut to crack, that's for sure.

Yeah, I saw that episode of Unbelievable not so along ago as well. And other than a few comments on covid vaccines, there wasn't much that was new said by either Collins or Dawkins in that, but it was good to see them chatting together.

Well, that's certainly a noble and fair-minded approach. Not everyone is willing to do that and expose themselves academically or intelligently to other points of view, especially on tough topics that carry a lot of weight for our decisions.

Yes, I'm familiar with a couple of those names, and they've done some interestng work as well, with Behe and Meyer being the two that I've read in the past. As for Berlinski, is he still an atheist? I haven't checked lately but I have his book, The Devil's Delusion, and it's a good read too.

Nope. I haven't heard about Lenski, and with you sharing him here I'm kind of perked to find out some more. I have a lot of literature myself, but it's always good to get additional names and angles to add to the weight of the info on all sides.

Ok. I haven't heard about Dr. Cronin either. I'll have to check him out too, soon. Thanks for that ref!

Oh, yes, I've hard those arguments. In fact, I even came up with them myself on my own when reading the Bible for the first time back when I initially found Christ. I wasn't surprised, really, being that I was already in the evolutionary camp in my thinking, but I thought that finding what there was an ill-fit and inconsistency in all of that, it made it doubly difficult to think through (at that time).

On my own part, being that I'm an existentialist as well and a Christian, I have essentially no desire to persuade any fellow Christian about whether evolution is true or not or historically accurate or not. All I really care about is whether they know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, so I don't press the issue. What's more, I don't think the evolution vs. creationism issue is the actual core issue. It does get much of the media attention and lobbying on both sides, but I think the real issues are other than this. So for me, evolution is a tertiary concer, even when it is a scientific and also philosophical locus of inquiry.

Where does the E vs. C debate rank on your spiritual or intellectual priority list now that you're a Christian, TreeStamp?
Can you elaborate on what existentialism is to you? Or means to you? Or helps you see the world and existence? And why you decided to consider yourself one?

I took a lower div GE philosophy class on existentialism. Learned a tiny bit about Sartre, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Camus, Dostoevsky. I thought it was all very interesting, and I was an agnostic/atheist back then when I took the class.

I don't know if David Berlinski is an atheist, but he scathingly criticizes evolution to many other titled peoples discomfort. I thought he was an agnostic. Hearing the criticisms of the various complicated scientific theories really helps me because I feel like the scientists themselves put a spin on the interpretation, and are not forthcoming about their own bias, and maybe not even forthcoming about the data itself.

Another person, not a Christian, and also believes in evolution, but criticizes modern physics and a physicist, and gives me a breath of fresh air on the topic of confusing modern physics and cosmology, is Sabine Hossenfelder on youtube. I have really learned a lot because she "removes the gobbledygook" from the topic. It really helped me to understand quantum mechanics and cosmology better because bias and various interpretations had really thrown me for a loop.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,540
29,058
Pacific Northwest
✟813,256.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
hey JimR-OCDS:

Your distinction between faith and religion is interesting to me.

It seems like God is more concerned with faith and morality in the individual than theology.

The gold standard 10 commandments emphasize the One God, no idols, and the various, most important moral laws.

And God seems to judge people/nations based on these moral laws.

But God does not seem to judge people on their various theologies. I know it may seem strange to talk about judging false theologies =) , but I am only trying to describe what I have noticed.

God does not care too much about the various theologies out there, but about faith, morality and how we treat others. I think that is totally fine and all, but I do think the non-unity of theology and understanding is actually very damaging to the church, the witness to others, and the spiritual health of the believers. My own personal belief, I may be wrong of course.

This may not be at all what you were talking about, but it made me think about something that has been bouncing around my head for years.

Please elaborate more though if you would.

If Faith is a gift of God's revelation of himself to us, then how are we to understand this God, except trying to grasp what the texts means? So we now know God exists, but what kind of God is He, what does he want? What is right, what is wrong? How are we to view Him, to view ourselves? Should we shudder in fear everyday knowing this all powerful God exists? Or should be bask in the warm love we now know exists towards us? Different faith traditions would answer these questions differently. I know the text says the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth. But what if you don't have a Bible. Or what if the Bible is interpreted wrong and you believe the person who tells you that. Like Paul talking about the Judiazers. Humans can usually be misled and misdirected very quickly and easily.

Does not our response (religion) to the Faith we have receive depend on our understanding about the situation? But what if we have Faith now, but our understanding is off for whatever reason?

Basically, my question comes down to understanding. If we now know God exists because he gave us the gift of faith, what kind of understanding of this new situation should we have?

Through faith we meet and know God through Christ. Which means everything changes. This is the meaning of "If you have known Me you have known the Father" and "If you have seen Me you have seen the Father" and "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father except through Me".

Faith is to behold God in Christ. Through faith we have come to know Christ's Father as our Father as well, for we have received sonship through Him. So that the Holy Spirit, now dwelling in and with us, causes us to cry out "Abba, Father". God is no longer hidden behind the heavy veil, God is no longer a distant voice thundering from Mt. Sinai causing the people to cry out in terror. Such is God without faith, and why it is said, "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God" and also, "No one may see Me and live". Not even to Moses was given the privilege to meet God in fullness, but was granted but only the tiniest and barest glimmer of the Divine Glory--and we read that he had to veil his face for it shone as bright as the sun afterward.

But through faith we have met God as God gives Himself to us through Jesus. We therefore meet God not in glory and power, not on the mountain top, not in a pillar of fire or smoke. But in the humble Carpenter from Nazareth who is brought before Pontius Pilate and suffers. Who bears the cross of human suffering, the cross of all our sin. Who hangs, nailed to the cross, naked and beaten and bleeding. The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

Such is foolishness to human reason, as St. Paul says, "The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the very power of God" For, the Apostle adds, God chose the weak and foolish things to confound the strong and the wise. So God coming in foolishness and weakness is, in fact, the very wisdom and power of God. And so Christ is our righteousness, holiness, our strength and our wisdom. The cross changes everything. God on the cross changes everything.

Through the cross we meet God, not as a distant shadow or a dreadful power hidden, but as the Compassionate Savior who shows us the friendly, fatherly heart of God. The veil has been rent, and the Holy of Holies has come to us, and we have stepped into the Presence of God clothed with Jesus Christ even as God has come to us clothed in Jesus Christ. And in Christ God meets us, and we meet God.

And we, who have met God in Christ--through our baptism, through His word, through the Holy Supper--are forever changed. To us is tasked to take up our own cross and follow Jesus. To us is the call to be merciful even as God is merciful. To us is the commandment to love our neighbor, to love our enemy, to bless and not curse, to turn the other cheek, and to pray for those who persecute us. To us has been given the charge to seek first the kingdom of God.

Jesus said "I will build My Church and not even the gates of Hades shall prevail against it", and has given the keys of the kingdom that this Church will, in the midst of the world, preach His word, proclaim forgiveness of sins, baptize in the Threefold name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. That Christ Himself shall reign as King and Head, through the Church, as this Gospel--this Good News--is proclaimed eastward and westward, northward and southward, beginning first in Jerusalem, and to all nations, to every tribe and tongue of men. That the love and grace and kindness of the Savior finds its rest in the hearts of sinners, in lives that were broken being fixed, in the weak and the hurting restored, in sinners being forgiven and finding hope and healing and salvation from God.

For God intends to take this world and make it new. God intends to take all the broken pieces of creation and put them back together, to enter into all the dark places, the hurting places, the broken and destroyed places and renew, restore, and heal. That even as Christ was raised from the dead, so shall God raise us up from the dead on the last day. And all of creation itself shall find its rest in Him. That creation which cries out even now in pain, having been subjected to death and misery, shall at long last be fully restored and healed: New heavens and new earth. God shall be all in all.

To that end, Christ still today asks, "Who do you say that I am?"

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Evolution and the Bible both deal with a common ancestor. People do not read the genealogies in the Bible, so they do not understand that. I always read every word in the Bible and I did not skip over anything. The Bible talks about Eden and Science - Biology tells us what a biodiverse ecosystem is. I have a bush that grows like crazy. The birds love that tree and they fertilize it. So it is a whole ecosystem in itself. I have a book about that called the song of trees.
When I first became a theist I read the Bible straight through 4 times, every chapter, over the course of time (years). Using NIV, NKJV, and NASB. =)

It definitely does help and add a background which I would not want to be missing in my mindset.

Its what led me to count the years and genealogies on paper, and to see the time frames of longevity, and periods for events and certain people:

who was alive, how many generations, when Adam and Even died, things before flood, Enoch, fallen angles, Noah, Flood, how long after did Noah die and how many generations were alive then, Abraham, Moses, Egypt, Israel, David, fall of Israel, Fall of judah, exile, return to Judah, last prophet Malachi, Messiah, etc
 
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
who was alive, how many generations, when Adam and Even died, things before flood, Enoch, fallen angles, Noah, Flood, how long after did Noah die and how many generations were alive then, Abraham, Moses, Egypt, Israel, David, fall of Israel, Fall of judah, exile, return to Judah, last prophet Malachi, Messiah, etc
All of that is in Bishop Usshers book. As far as I can tell his work is accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TreeStamp1
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Through faith we meet and know God through Christ.
I was seeking to know God, He lead me to Jesus, Jesus lead me to the Holy Spirit The Spirit lead me back to Jesus and Jesus lead me back to God the Father. My relationship is still with God even though I hear people say they are closer to Jesus. I still do not understand why God allows us to suffer as much as we do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TreeStamp1
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
All of that is in Bishop Usshers book. As far as I can tell his work is accurate.
Yes, I have not read much of Usshers book myself.

What's interesting to me though about all these biblically historical details is that in no place can you insert the "end of Myth and beginning of actual history".

Its one consistent line of history, genealogies and all. Its quoted by the New Testament as such.

An evolutionary perspective would have to draw some line saying where the history is and where its myth. You are left to decide for yourself what parts of "God's word" are actually "true", and what are allegorical myth.

Were Adam and Even the first 2 real human beings, not descended from Apes?

Was there a global flood, and a pre-flood world which looked drastically different?

Was Noah a real person?

Was Abraham a real person?

Was Moses a descendent of Abraham who had anything to do with Egypt?

Did the Israeli nation actually exist, exiled to Babylon and return?
 
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I was seeking to know God, He lead me to Jesus, Jesus lead me to the Holy Spirit The Spirit lead me back to Jesus and Jesus lead me back to God the Father. My relationship is still with God even though I hear people say they are closer to Jesus. I still do not understand why God allows us to suffer as much as we do.

Yeah, exactly. I know God exists from my NDE/OBE.

And I know Jesus is the "representative of God" so to speak, for two reasons.

One, no other faith tradition makes theistic or historical sense like the OT/NT. Explaining all of human experience and existence.

Two, in Jesus name so many things happen, from salvation to healings.

And Three (lol), the logic and historical details about Jesus resurrection are very strong to an open mind. Even secular sources.

Why God allows us to suffer so much:

I have no real good explanation for myself other than some version of Open Theism has really set me free to let God off the Hook =)
 
Upvote 0

TreeStamp1

Member
Feb 14, 2021
19
9
Western US
✟23,713.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I am curious how you see "religiosity". As you mention not wanting that.

I feel like the best thing I can do here is simply provide my own personal story.

I was raised in a Christian home, namely Evangelical. My family attended a conservative non-denominational (non-Charismatic) church that simply identified itself as a "Bible church". It was my mom's childhood church, and it's where my parents met and got married. When I was eight years old my family was kicked out of the church because one of the church elders was having an affair, his then wife was friends with my mom in the choir, and he was able to divorce his wife and marry his mistress by accusing his wife of infidelity, accusing her of having a same-sex affair with my mom. The result was my mom being put under a kind of inquisition style situation where she was told she had to repent and then confess before the entire congregation (twice, once for each Sunday service, in front of thousands of people). Because my mom hadn't done anything wrong, and because she refused to humiliate and shame herself before thousands of people, my family was no longer welcome.

I'm forty years old now, and I would be lying if I said I don't still have some bitter feelings over what that elder--and that church--did to my mom and my family. It's something I am still working through as it pertains to forgiveness, because it left a very deep wound in my family. As, even after my mom passed away from cancer, I would still have people from that church come up to me and who believed all sorts of lies and gossips about my family. And it hurts when, after losing your mother, to have adults come up to you not to say, "Sorry to hear about your mom's passing" but "Sorry that your mom was a lesbian harlot".

Fortunately, after we left that church we found a welcoming congregation that was part of the Foursquare denomination, a Pentecostal denomination. At the time they didn't even have their own church building, and were using the local YMCA to meet on Sunday morning. It was a very small and very loving group of Christians who were there to help my mom, and the rest of us, heal.

However, after several years, we merged with another local Foursquare church one town over, and then a little while after that our pastor left because the higher-ups moved him out of state and we got another, younger pastor. Under the new pastor, and new leadership the things in that church began changing. By the time I was 18 years old, after my mom had passed and my dad had to move across the state because of his work, I no longer felt like I was part of it--though I was an active member in my youth group.

Also in my late teen years I had began to study Scripture more, and study the early Church Fathers, and started exploring other theological traditions within Christianity. I developed a hunger to learn more about Christianity. And that itself began to put me at odds with some of my own Christian friends. I remember at one point saying that I wanted to believe what Jesus' Apostles believed and to take seriously what they wrote and said in the New Testament--the response I got was surprising, that it shouldn't matter what the Apostles believed, instead it just mattered what the Bible said (surprising, because if I was to take the Bible seriously then that is the same thing, the Bible says what those who wrote it believed).

From the age of 18 and into my 20's I didn't have a church home. I visited a lot of churches. After moving to a new city, I continued to visit and explore, but I myself didn't know where to belong. I looked at a lot of different churches, for sometime I seriously considered the Charismatic Episcopalian Church. As I was, at the time, somewhere in-between still Charismatic/Pentecostal in some of my theology and also liturgical traditional. At the same time I was also looking at the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, because, again, I was interested in taking Jesus seriously, and therefore taking Christian history seriously.

In my early-mid 20's I eventually had a rather profound exchange with a Lutheran on an online discussion, on a forum similar to one like this. It was a rather simple expression of the Lutheran understanding of Justification. And it blew my mind, and I started looking into Lutheranism--which I hadn't really done before then.

What I haven't mentioned in any of this, was that throughout my life, ever since I was a very small child I struggled with the idea of my own salvation. I had been raised to believe that my salvation depended on my ability to make a sincere and genuine decision to believe and follow Jesus, and if that decision was sincere and genuine, then I could know I was truly saved. And, conversely, if I couldn't pinpoint a precise moment where I made a genuine decision for Jesus, then--maybe--maybe I wasn't saved at all.

At the age of almost four years old, my parents led me through the "Sinner's Prayer" and I "Asked Jesus into my heart". But I was four years old, and didn't fully grasp what was going on. When I was about eight years old, I was already having a crisis of faith, talking to my dad about how could I know if I "really meant it" when I asked Jesus into my heart. I was eight years old and unsure how to know how if I could "really mean" something. So my dad led me through the "Sinner's Prayer" again, just to make sure I meant it this time--but I still didn't know. And I didn't know how to know.

When I was twelve, a traveling evangelist came to my Pentecostal church, and I was one of several other kids my age who went up front to "receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in tongues". Like almost everyone else who went up, when the evangelist prayed and laid hands over me, I fell to the ground and began speaking in ecstatic utterances.

But I still didn't know if I "meant it" when I asked Jesus to be my personal Lord and Savior, and I was told that I should be showing evidences of a transformed and sanctified life--bearing fruit. And yet, I was now twelve years old and undergoing puberty, and my hormones and my brain were a total mess. It seemed like the more seriously I was trying to take my faith, the more unsure I was of it. It felt like the more I wanted to obey God, the more sinful I was. The more I desired God, the worse I seemed to be--and rather than leading me to comfort and peace with God, I was constantly afraid and terrified. Terrified that I was beyond redemption, terrified that I was rejected by God for my lack of faith and was destined to eternal torment in hell. That God could love others, but not me, I was beyond hope.

By the time I was sixteen years old I was active in my youth group. And I went on my first mission trip to help serve the homeless and work with a church in San Francisco doing outreach in the inner city. It was an important experience for me, and I grew a lot. I came back "on fire" for God. But peeling back the veil, I was still a scared child who was unable to shake the feeling that I was beyond redemption. I would, frequently, spend hours privately in my bedroom literally cry out to God while laying prostrate on my face--begging Him to make me holy, begging Him to save me, begging Him to make me better. And sometimes, sometimes I felt a little better, but then I would trip up again, and again feel like I was beyond hope. After all, why was I not seeing the fruits of holiness in my life? Why was I constantly struggling with the same things over and over?

And those feelings lingered in me into adulthood. So when, finally, in my 20's I had a Lutheran explain the Lutheran view of Justification, my mind was truly and thoroughly blown away. God could save me simply because He loved me and wanted to? I could be saved entirely apart from even myself, simply because Jesus lived, suffered, died, and rose again? It wasn't up to me to show God how much I loved Him, it was up to God to show me how much He loved me? These were mind-blowing ideas that fundamentally turned an entire lifetime of religious experiences on their head.

As such, I very frequently tell people that I stumbled backward, that I tripped and fell into Lutheranism entirely by accident. Lutheranism was never on my radar. Of all the churches I was exploring, Lutheranism just wasn't even in my peripheral vision. And then suddenly, as though struck by lightning, I suddenly wanted to know more about it. And what I discovered in the Lutheran tradition was truly radical. The more I learned, the more I read Scripture, the more things just seemed to click. But I was, at the same time, afraid to start going to a Lutheran church--what would my family think? After all, when I had first started studying Church history and theology, a lot of my Evangelical friends thought I was walking away from Jesus. When I left my home town I learned of rumors being spread about me, some pretty awful things--such as that I had become a drug dealer.

It took a few years, almost into my 30's, but I eventually did build up the courage to start attending a Lutheran church, accepting that even if there would be people who didn't like it, I had to follow my conscience, and that what I needed and wanted was to hear the Gospel being preached. I've never looked back since then.

The goal of me mentioning Lutheranism isn't to say "You should be Lutheran". The goal is simply to share some of my own personal experiences. I do believe that there is something uniquely special about the Lutheran tradition, but I don't feel comfortable simply telling someone "Be what I am". But I do encourage people to study theology, and to always be willing to challenge their own assumptions on matters of religion.

-CryptoLutheran
I have not responded to you yet ViaCrucias because when I first read half this post a few days ago I starting crying, and shut off the computer for a while and went to work on my car to get my mind off things. So I have skipped over your posts until a later time.
 
Upvote 0

JimR-OCDS

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love
Oct 28, 2008
19,636
4,237
The Kingdom of Heaven
Visit site
✟246,761.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
hey JimR-OCDS:

Your distinction between faith and religion is interesting to me.

It seems like God is more concerned with faith and morality in the individual than theology.

The gold standard 10 commandments emphasize the One God, no idols, and the various, most important moral laws.

And God seems to judge people/nations based on these moral laws.

But God does not seem to judge people on their various theologies. I know it may seem strange to talk about judging false theologies =) , but I am only trying to describe what I have noticed.

God does not care too much about the various theologies out there, but about faith, morality and how we treat others. I think that is totally fine and all, but I do think the non-unity of theology and understanding is actually very damaging to the church, the witness to others, and the spiritual health of the believers. My own personal belief, I may be wrong of course.

This may not be at all what you were talking about, but it made me think about something that has been bouncing around my head for years.

Please elaborate more though if you would.

If Faith is a gift of God's revelation of himself to us, then how are we to understand this God, except trying to grasp what the texts means? So we now know God exists, but what kind of God is He, what does he want? What is right, what is wrong? How are we to view Him, to view ourselves? Should we shudder in fear everyday knowing this all powerful God exists? Or should be bask in the warm love we now know exists towards us? Different faith traditions would answer these questions differently. I know the text says the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth. But what if you don't have a Bible. Or what if the Bible is interpreted wrong and you believe the person who tells you that. Like Paul talking about the Judiazers. Humans can usually be misled and misdirected very quickly and easily.

Does not our response (religion) to the Faith we have receive depend on our understanding about the situation? But what if we have Faith now, but our understanding is off for whatever reason?

Basically, my question comes down to understanding. If we now know God exists because he gave us the gift of faith, what kind of understanding of this new situation should we have?
Pope Francis said that you can have degrees in theology and still not have faith.

The humblest simple people had great faith and were visited even from Heaven.
Read about St Bernadette and see how humble she was,

Let go and let God, is how we're transformed.

We can't force ourselves to have faith, only be open to it. As it's said in Scripture,
"seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and all these things will be added onto you."

In other words, the understanding you seek, will come from God and it will come
in ways you least expect it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
22,713
19,729
Flyoverland
✟1,359,120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I mean Pre-Trib was not help by the early church, but was thought up a couple hundred years ago, and I heard Brian Brodersen basically say on radio sermon that he was thankful that God revealed this truth so late in Church History.

What? Hidden for 1800 years and no early church belief at all???? I love Calvary Chapel's heart though. Appreciate them. But theology and doctrine is so all over the place and not grounded in early understanding. Protestantism is like a dirty bomb shooting off shards in all directions. :p
Not to deny so many faithful Protestants, but have you checked out the groups that existed before the 'dirty bomb' went off. I wouldn't use that 'dirty bomb' analogy but would instead maybe say that it was a natural result of some mess in the Catholic Church at the time, and if we were all decent faithful people with the heart of Christ it wouldn't have lasted 500 years. Anyhow, any explorations into Catholicism or Orthodoxy? Our histories do go way back.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
22,713
19,729
Flyoverland
✟1,359,120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
You don't know what you don't know.

So for me the Bible is only "not enough" because there is so much confusion about what the Bible actually says and means. Sola scriptura is great idealistically. But protestants are all over the map, so the theory in practice it does not work. Plus the Scriptures themselves were decided by imperfect believers who were not always unanimous to be authoritative. Some viewed Enoch as valid. Some viewed the Apocalypse of Peter as valid. I am not talking heresy, but Deuterocanon stuff.
Have you read 'Dei Verbum' from Vatican II? It's not all that well known but it is a big chunk of how Catholics are to look at the Bible. It's not Sola Scriptura but what might be called Prima Scriptura. Tradition has it's place. So does careful study.

 
Upvote 0