I don't believe in evolution... (2)

[rjc34]

I would also recommend getting yourself an english version of a synopsis of the four gospels. It allows us to look at the ways that each evangelist tells the story in a way that fits the particular purpose of the gospel.

Luke, for instance, seems to routinely downplay any conflict between the Jews and the Romans. E.G the story of the raising of the centurion's servant (or son if the gospel of John is to be believed), in Luke the centurion is shown as being deferential toward the Jewish elders, sending the Jewish elders to speak to Jesus out of respect and even being said to have financed the construction of the synagogue. We can infer that Luke may have been writing with an eye toward an audience sympathetic to or composed of Romans. His project may have been to present the jewish roots of Christianity as something that could be seen as respectable by a metropolitan audience. Hence his high-falutin' Theophilos prologue and overall positive portrayal of Romans especially centurions.

Any particular synopses or analyses you'd recommend? (I've read both theological and historical analyses of various parts of the bible, but I'm always interested in what others recommend.)

There is a middle way between atheistic rejection of the Christian story as incredible and a fundamentalistic clinging to a facticity that does not capture the genius of scripture. That middle way is called the Main-Line protestant church and, I might add, a good deal of the Catholic church too.

I'll have to disagree with you here... I think you're contrasting fundamentalist Christianity with so called 'strong' or 'gnostic' atheists (those who claim to know that no gods exist). There are extremely few of these (and most of them are the young and naive ones). I think the middle ground would be my position, ignostic agnostic atheist. (Well, specifically the agnostic part). I make no claims of knowledge as to the existence of a god or gods, but I reject the current claims because they have failed to fill their burden of proof.

I say these because while main-line protestants and moderate Catholics may reject fundamentalism, I highly doubt you'd find any that would consider calling themselves an agnostic theist... Gnostic claims by definition bear the burden of proof, and I doubt any Christian would refuse to make a knowledge claim on the existence of Yahweh.

 

[jgarden]

If you believe that God created the "universe," the mechanics (evolution vs creationism) and timelines (6 days vs 4 billion years) are largely irrelevant.

Psalm 93:1 - The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

Psalm 96:10 - Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously

1 Chronicles 16:30 - Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.

Psalm 104:5 - He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

Ecclesiasties 1:5 - The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.

Four centuries ago, the Christian Church intervened on scientific matters and mistakenly excommunicated Galileo (father of modern observational astronomy", the "father of modern physics", the "father of modern science), based on its literal interpretation of Scripture. Even the Catholic Church has been forced to admit that it was wrong and Galileo's "heliocentric" views were correct.

The last thing the Church needs is to have their religion further discredited by conservatives trying to make "creationism" the "litmus test" for becoming a "true" Christian!

 

[Zongerfield]

Reply by Zongerfield
But to your point, where did I say that "feeling" God was a "prerequisite for believing that Christ is who He says He."

You didn’t nor did I say that feeling cannot be a part of believing that Christ is who He says He is. I was adding that feelings do not have to be a part of believing.

What you said was:
And if after your prayer, you don't feel even the slightest bit touched, ie the hairs on the back of your neck don't stand up, or if you don't sense a prickling in your inner-consciousness, than you can forsake the Lord and ask him to damn you to hell.
You implied that if there was not feelings then you have the choice to be damned to hell. Connecting the lack of feeling with being damned to hell is not supported by scriptures that I know of. It seems that you want rjc to experience what you want him to experience and if he does not you bring up a bad consequence (damn you to hell).



Reply by Zonderfield
may I ask you, have you physically "felt" the presence of God in your life?
Of course I have but most of the time in my spiritual life I do not have the kind of feeling that you described to rjc.

I'm happy you pointed out the fact that one doesn't necessarily need to "feel" the presence of God to know that he exists. I think that is important.

But I will say that all of the Christians I know have "felt" the presence of God in their lives. You included.

God is here, with us at all times. If unbelievers truly open their hearts and minds to God, they will "feel" his presence. I think this is just the way it works.

Do you agree with me?

 

[sdmsanjose]

Reply by rjc
Ah the sacred bond between a father and son. Unbreakable some might say.

Personally the main difference lies in the fact that your son can see, touch, hear and experience you as really real, right in front of his eyes. From everyone I've spoken to here the main thing that pops out to me is that nobody's experience of God or the Holy Spirit is ever congruent with anyone else's.

You are right I have never heard or touched God.

I have prayed to God about a specific situation and what happened later was life changing. Here is the story that I base my statement on.

I had my college years handed to me on a gold platter; new car, all expenses paid, encouragement from parents, you name it I had it. What did I do? I lasted less than a year in college because I wanted to party and do things that I enjoyed. I got a girlfriend, then got married, then had a child, then met reality. I had no college education, no skills, and wound up working in a cotton gin then in a sweat shop. Who did I have to blame? Nobody but myself and I did not deserve to have a good job because I was irresponsible and selfish and did not want to sacrifice my pleasures.

One night at the sweat shop I was feeling sorry for myself and unhappy and for some reason I told God that I would not complain anymore and be happy with the life that I had made for myself. My prayer was somewhat of a shock to me as I was not accustomed to praying. Within a very short time a person came to me and asked me if I wanted to attend Night College for a position that would be opening up in around a year. I was desperate to get out of the sweat shop so I did it. After completing the required course there was one position that opened up and there were around 30 students that took that course for that job. Long story short I got that job and this year makes 40 years on the job and I still enjoy my job to this very day. Because of this job my family has not been in need for one necessity and in fact they have had some luxuries.

What does that have to do with touching and hearing God? Well I did not touch God or hear God but my life and my whole family has been touched by this job that I got. Yes I believe that it was an answer to prayer. Do you think that it was my doing? My doing was to take 5 years to get through high school with a D average. What I was good at was parting, being irresponsible and selfish. I got myself a no brainer sweat shop job and now I am a white collar professional. I could tell you how I took the bull by the horns and picked myself up by my bootstraps and it was all me that made it happen. That just is not the case, I was helped!

No I have not touched or heard God but it is not real hard for me to believe that a power greater than humans has shown me grace that has been a significant positive in my life and my families life for over 40 years! You can give me all the credit if you want to but I know better.

Rjc, I am just giving you my real life experience but I do not expect you to have the same or even a similar experience that I had. I cannot explain why people do not have congruent spiritual experiences, I can barely understand a little of my own experiences.

 

[sdmsanjose]

Reply by jgarden
The last thing the Church needs is to have their religion further discredited by conservatives trying to make "creationism" the "litmus test" for becoming a "true" Christian!

For me the litmus test for being a “true” Christian is striving to fulfill the two greatest commandments


Matthew 22


36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38This is the first and great commandment.
39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Trying to get close to fulfilling these two commandments is a real task!

Science is great and has been very helpful to mankind but the Bible is not a science book. Scientific evidence and faith are like oil and water. I do not look to the Bible to see how to map DNA or to explain dinosaurs and conversely I do not look to science to prove the existents of God.

 

[sdmsanjose]

Reply by Zongerfield
God is here, with us at all times. If unbelievers truly open their hearts and minds to God, they will "feel" his presence. I think this is just the way it works.

Do you agree with me?

I really do not know. I think you are generally right but then I know that I do not know how God and all unbelievers work. I know that in my case when I came to God it was mostly with the mind. Not that I had figured it all out but I had been drawn by the story of his love and the presenter then later I made up my mind. My father’s experience was completely different and had lots of feeling involved.


Two of the verses that I thought of when you posted your post are listed below:

Matthew 11:28
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest


Luke 11:10
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened


I know that the scriptures are more credible than I am so I hope the two above add to your post.


Zongerfield, your zeal is noted.

 

[rjc34]

You are right I have never heard or touched God.

I have prayed to God about a specific situation and what happened later was life changing. Here is the story that I base my statement on.

I had my college years handed to me on a gold platter; new car, all expenses paid, encouragement from parents, you name it I had it. What did I do? I lasted less than a year in college because I wanted to party and do things that I enjoyed. I got a girlfriend, then got married, then had a child, then met reality. I had no college education, no skills, and wound up working in a cotton gin then in a sweat shop. Who did I have to blame? Nobody but myself and I did not deserve to have a good job because I was irresponsible and selfish and did not want to sacrifice my pleasures.

One night at the sweat shop I was feeling sorry for myself and unhappy and for some reason I told God that I would not complain anymore and be happy with the life that I had made for myself. My prayer was somewhat of a shock to me as I was not accustomed to praying. Within a very short time a person came to me and asked me if I wanted to attend Night College for a position that would be opening up in around a year. I was desperate to get out of the sweat shop so I did it. After completing the required course there was one position that opened up and there were around 30 students that took that course for that job. Long story short I got that job and this year makes 40 years on the job and I still enjoy my job to this very day. Because of this job my family has not been in need for one necessity and in fact they have had some luxuries.

What does that have to do with touching and hearing God? Well I did not touch God or hear God but my life and my whole family has been touched by this job that I got. Yes I believe that it was an answer to prayer. Do you think that it was my doing? My doing was to take 5 years to get through high school with a D average. What I was good at was parting, being irresponsible and selfish. I got myself a no brainer sweat shop job and now I am a white collar professional. I could tell you how I took the bull by the horns and picked myself up by my bootstraps and it was all me that made it happen. That just is not the case, I was helped!

No I have not touched or heard God but it is not real hard for me to believe that a power greater than humans has shown me grace that has been a significant positive in my life and my families life for over 40 years! You can give me all the credit if you want to but I know better.

Rjc, I am just giving you my real life experience but I do not expect you to have the same or even a similar experience that I had. I cannot explain why people do not have congruent spiritual experiences, I can barely understand a little of my own experiences.

Stories like this are always touching, but if you asked me what I really think happened, I'd say coincidence. It's hard for me to imagine an all powerful god giving you a blessing such as this, while billions of other people are starving and dying through no fault of their own, praying and not being answered, and God though it was more important to help you find a job to support your family than it was to feed those billions of starving children?

The problem of evil and suffering was one of the first philosophical conundrums that for me, Christianity never could provide a solid answer for. It was, for me, I guess the first nail in the coffin.

 

[I <3 Abraham]

Any particular synopses or analyses you'd recommend? (I've read both theological and historical analyses of various parts of the bible, but I'm always interested in what others recommend.)

I don't mean synopsis as in a summary or commentary. I mean synopsis in the Greek "Sun-Opsis" (see together) sense. It is a presentation of all four gospels that puts the parallel passages next to one another. Basically, every page has 4 columns: Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. If a story appears in only one gospel, the other columns will be blank (this is mostly with John). If a story appears in both Luke and Matthew, for example, then those columns will each have text in them. It allows the reader to see the differences between the gospels side by side without any need to flip back and forth.

So, with the example of the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum, the reader can see that John says it is the centurion's son and not his servant. In addition, you can see that Luke says that the centurion asked Jewish elders to go talk to Jesus. In Matthew, the centurion approaches Jesus directly. There are numerous other interesting differences, ones that point toward some of the particular emphasis of each evangelist.

I'll have to disagree with you here... I think you're contrasting fundamentalist Christianity with so called 'strong' or 'gnostic' atheists (those who claim to know that no gods exist). There are extremely few of these (and most of them are the young and naive ones). I think the middle ground would be my position, ignostic agnostic atheist. (Well, specifically the agnostic part). I make no claims of knowledge as to the existence of a god or gods, but I reject the current claims because they have failed to fill their burden of proof.

Well, I am mostly trying to address issues of scriptural authority, not the existence of God per-se. I consider scripture to have a great deal of authority, but I do not think that it is inerrant in the sense that fundamentalists use that. Often, folks get nervous about allowing any wiggle room about the truth of scripture because it could mean the whole house of cards will come crashing down. So they go for the 2 Tim 3 whatnot as a basis for saying that all of scripture is literally true. The problem is that you need to be on board with the truth of 2 Tim, or it doesn't make any kind of sense. Further, you need to agree with a very narrow interpretation of what that verse is saying. Scriptural support for the inerrancy of scripture is circular argument.

I say these because while main-line protestants and moderate Catholics may reject fundamentalism, I highly doubt you'd find any that would consider calling themselves an agnostic theist... Gnostic claims by definition bear the burden of proof, and I doubt any Christian would refuse to make a knowledge claim on the existence of Yahweh.

Well, I for one do not claim to have knowledge about the existence of God. And the things you are talking about, burden of proof, knowledge claims, etc. don't relate to my own Christianity that much. I don't make knowledge claims about God, I will give testimony about my own faith. I think that on perhaps two or three occasions in my life I have had a clear sense of God's involvement in my life. They were not miraculous and they were not even, perhaps, remarkable. These episodes are very important to me, so neeless to say I will not be sharing them on this website.

 

[rjc34]

I don't mean synopsis as in a summary or commentary. I mean synopsis in the Greek "Sun-Opsis" (see together) sense. It is a presentation of all four gospels that puts the parallel passages next to one another. Basically, every page has 4 columns: Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. If a story appears in only one gospel, the other columns will be blank (this is mostly with John). If a story appears in both Luke and Matthew, for example, then those columns will each have text in them. It allows the reader to see the differences between the gospels side by side without any need to flip back and forth.

Oh, right, now I get what you mean. I wasn't even aware they had these! I had to do it all the old fashioned way, with post-it notes! I've read some books by Bart Ehrman on the topic, it's very interesting stuff.

Well, I am mostly trying to address issues of scriptural authority, not the existence of God per-se. I consider scripture to have a great deal of authority, but I do not think that it is inerrant in the sense that fundamentalists use that. Often, folks get nervous about allowing any wiggle room about the truth of scripture because it could mean the whole house of cards will come crashing down. So they go for the 2 Tim 3 whatnot as a basis for saying that all of scripture is literally true. The problem is that you need to be on board with the truth of 2 Tim, or it doesn't make any kind of sense. Further, you need to agree with a very narrow interpretation of what that verse is saying. Scriptural support for the inerrancy of scripture is circular argument.

"Why do you believe the bible to be true?"
"Well God wrote the bible!"
"And how do you know that?"
"Because the bible says all scripture is 'God-breathed'!"


The circularity is quite wonderful, is it not?

Also, since you describe yourself as not a literalist or a fundamentalist, but you give a lot of authority to the scriptures, what is your criteria for decided what to believe and what to reject?

Well, I for one do not claim to have knowledge about the existence of God.

So you're also open to evidence and philosophical arguments directed ether way to sway your opinion?

I'm curious, since this the OP topic is completely gone now, how would you feel about having a discussion on the problem of evil/suffering? It's a topic that interests me greatly.

And the things you are talking about, burden of proof, knowledge claims, etc. don't relate to my own Christianity that much. I don't make knowledge claims about God, I will give testimony about my own faith. I think that on perhaps two or three occasions in my life I have had a clear sense of God's involvement in my life. They were not miraculous and they were not even, perhaps, remarkable. These episodes are very important to me, so neeless to say I will not be sharing them on this website.

What is your criteria for determining an event where God has been involved versus a coincidence (however improbably it may seem)?

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I'm happy you pointed out the fact that one doesn't necessarily need to "feel" the presence of God to know that he exists. I think that is important.

But I will say that all of the Christians I know have "felt" the presence of God in their lives. You included.

God is here, with us at all times. If unbelievers truly open their hearts and minds to God, they will "feel" his presence. I think this is just the way it works.

Do you agree with me?

I had an open heart for years, but God never came and I never "felt his presence". What does this mean for me? That God didn't intend for me to feel his presence, or that I was callous? I'm pretty sure I wasn't callous. Thus, it's God who refused to partake in the conversation. Then I am justified in my lack of belief because the only way to be sure is through personal experience.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Well certainly one of us is wrong about America being founded as a Christian Nation.

Atheists will always say Christians advocate genocide, even though Atheists advocate activities (Adultery and Homosexuality) that lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty.

I believe most evil in the world is by Atheists.

So all those child-molesting priests - atheists? All those fanatics bombing abortion clinics - atheists?

 

[Charlie V]

My father was an atheist, and he opposed homosexuality.
My sister-in-law is a Christian, and she is a homosexual.

Therefore, your statement about atheists advocating homosexuality is false.

Also, since my sister-in-law is a lesbian and lesbians have a lower rate of sexually transmitted disease than any other group including heterosexuals, your "...lead to disease..." statement is false.

As for "leading to poverty," (though I'm not sure the economic connection, unless you are admitting that homosexuals are discriminated against in the workplace) didn't Jesus say that it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle? This almost implies to me that your "sin list" is actually a list of good things... they lead us away from becoming the rich man who cannot enter the kingdom.

Seems strange, though, to be blaming poverty on sinful behavior, considering all the things Jesus said about the poor, and about the rich. I don't recall Jesus ever blaming the poor for their poverty.

Comments like this that mention "poverty" as if poverty itself is a sin or a sign of sin, lead me to reflect on my great aunt who died at age 87 back in 1999. She was a Sunday school teacher. When we were children, she constantly preached Bible stories to us children. She had a heart of gold. Loving, caring, nurturing, to everyone she met. She was poor, made less than $10,000 a year... yet when she got paid, she would write checks to a list of charities. I know, because when her eyesight was failing, I went to her house and wrote her checks for her. She had nothing, and yet, her heart always went out to people who had even less.

Charlie

 

[HosannaHM]

I believe most evil in the world is by Atheists.

Evil comes from every belief system-Whether Atheist or Christian or anything else. After all, everyone originally has some form of evil within them. How many Christians out there make stumbling blocks for other believers, or promote violence as much as you do?

Love of Christ, Clirus

 

[keith99]

Evil comes from every belief system-Whether Atheist or Christian or anything else. After all, everyone originally has some form of evil within them. How many Christians out there make stumbling blocks for other believers, or promote violence as much as you do?

Love of Christ, Clirus

I'd guess you are one of those Christians who is not perfect, just forgiven.

Or put differently, the kind of Christian that gives a agnostic like me reason to stop and think that sometimes Christianity does bear good fruit.

 

[Skavau]

Well certainly one of us is wrong about America being founded as a Christian Nation.

Atheists will always say Christians advocate genocide, even though Atheists advocate activities (Adultery and Homosexuality) that lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty.

I believe most evil in the world is by Atheists.

But you actually do advocate genocide.

Godwin's Law is possibly slightly tame for you.

 

[TheReasoner]

Well certainly one of us is wrong about America being founded as a Christian Nation.

America is a continent. Not a nation. As for the USA, it was not. Just read up on your own history.

Atheists will always say Christians advocate genocide, even though Atheists advocate activities (Adultery and Homosexuality) that lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty.

I believe most evil in the world is by Atheists.

But Clirus, you actually do advocate genocide.
Christians* don't. You do.

*Christians, followers of Jesus Christ.

 

[HosannaHM]

I'd guess you are one of those Christians who is not perfect, just forgiven.

Or put differently, the kind of Christian that gives a agnostic like me reason to stop and think that sometimes Christianity does bear good fruit.

I'm not worthy of those compliments, but thank you very much Keith

When I see people posting things like Zongerfield and Cliris do with what seems like they have no thought or concern towards everyone they are speaking to it just dissapoints me.

Jesus Christ is uplifting, not condemning

 

[Nathan Poe]

Jesus Christ is uplifting, not condemning

Which may explain why so many "Christians" reject him -- there's nothing in it for themselves to uplift others.

 

[TheReasoner]

Which may explain why so many "Christians" reject him -- there's nothing in it for themselves to uplift others.

Well, the bible says a lot about the fruits of the spirit. iamnot87 is right. Christ is uplifting, not condemning. So whoever is in Him will be the same way. To a lesser extent, of course. We're humans - and we believe Jesus was God's son. Jesus>>man.

I think Christianity has become a hobby religion for so many. A part of their cultural identity more than their life as a whole. Some people - like neo-nazis and other nationalistic groups put a lot of stock in cultural or ethnic identity, enough to kill for. So it is not surprising that when a religion has grown far enough it will become mainstream enough to pick up a few nutjobs who use it to justify the same kind of hatred. What Clirus is doing is essentially not different from what the neo-nazis do. They focus on race, Clirus has found her justification in a perversion of God's son. Blasphemy? Aye. I think so.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yes.

Atheists spend a lot of time and effort to try to destroy the Christian Religion, in order to justify their unbelief.

Are you seriously claiming that these people are, contrary to their own stated beliefs, Atheists? How absurd.