• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Is Christianity a religion of "No?"

Discussion in 'Ethics & Morality' started by seeking.IAM, Nov 1, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    Coming to the conclusion that Jesus is god is either an emotional reaction when people are vulnerable and need something to believe in, manipulated by Ministers or Christians in various settings (such as at a revival or church service), other intense psychological situations or a placid acceptance of such by religious influencers over time. The person often (but not always) has a peak experience which they attributed to having a special religious experience and encounter with god. This helps to convince them and make them feel special. Similar experiences has been noted within other religions or groups or situations. It is purely natural and has no connection to a divine encounter.
     
  2. Philip_B

    Philip_B grace upon grace Supporter

    +5,037
    Australia
    Anglican
    Married
    Sad but true.

    The truth of Christianity however is not found in moral perfection. Holiness is discovered not in ascertaining how good we are, but is discovering whose we are. Augustine argued that there were wolves inside the fold and sheep outside the fold, or as the 39 Articles put it, 'In the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good'.

    The strength of the Christian gospel is forgiveness far more than moral perfection. That does not mean that we should not try, and when we fail we know that all is not lost.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2021
  3. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +5,922
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
    Well said BRW - a completely rational conclusion.

    This thesis holds up perfectly as long as God does not exist...
     
  4. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    I don't think Jesus teaching was that unique as you can find most of it in the ancient world. We have superseded much of it today with ideas such as human rights, animal rights, and environmental rights. Jesus also had some very bad beliefs such as hell which are much worse than the worst ideas or actions of god in the OT (such as god commanding genocide). "If you don't go along with our little group and our ideas about god, then you will be confined to eternal torment." I can't think of a more horrible idea in all of fiction.

    I would like to meet some real wheat! Today the level of immorality, as you call it, would seem to be a very bad indicator (as perhaps a Puritan from the past would say) for most people, who call themselves Christians, to obtain their eternal reward. The moral compass seems to be broken so perhaps there are no real encounters any more with god. Even the Christians who follow their particular brand of "Christianity" seem not to be following another "Christianities" rules, encounters with god or ideas around grace. The proliferation of different Bibles doesn't help. Skeptics who say "which Bible is authoritative" have a good point. There are great differences between Bibles and lots of Christians don't dispute this. So which Bible? KJV/AV?
     
  5. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +5,922
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
     
  6. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    Yes, I would agree that grace is what counts most - both as a contribution in the life blood of Christianity and to humanity at large. This concept is worthy of something nobly human and not the base ideas that so much of religion including what other "Christianities" hold onto. I like the Anglican form of Christianity because it likes to focus on much of what is high minded in the human experience. The KJV and the Book of Common Prayer are outstanding examples and the best of written English along with Shakespeare in my opinion. I respect the Anglican attempt to be inclusive in their fellowship and of-course their choral tradition. I also respect their scholarship (along with Catholic scholarship) although I don't think it can rescue Christianity from the influences of modern and postmodern society. Jesus as an influential historical figure seems predicated on so little real evidence as to make his actual contribution inconsequential. Paul and the Christian communities that have arisen since seem to be how we must judge the "Christianities" . Some have arisen to show very noble human qualities (as per the more humanitarian and social sides) and other not so much (sectarian violence, war, crusades, power politics, and death). I would like to see Jesus study scholarship take up Richard Carrier's challenge to modernize it even more by applying more quantitative methods.

    I think also part of the best of the Christian message would be when it is truly inclusive. See that no one really is in the category of the other. Who and what we are is determined often by factors outside our control. As a fine Anglican had as his book title, ... In Understanding Be Men Christianity, in all its many forms, must grow up and evolve into the modern world giving up more and more its primitive ideas still tied to outdated ancient ideas, magic and superstition.
     
  7. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    I agree, there is much more to it. It is such things as:

    1. Not proactively limiting evil;
    2. Not proactively preventing evil;
    3. Being naive about evil (think Allies appeasement policy toward A. Hitler)
    4. Punishing the wrong people for the wrong reason
    ....
     
  8. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    What is your religious background? You seem to have an interesting education. What people did you study in your program?
     
  9. Aryeh Jay

    Aryeh Jay Veteran Supporter

    +12,471
    United States
    Married
    Like Egyptian and Canaanite children...
     
  10. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    Yes, unfortunately the Bible Colleges have a very low standard of academic excellence. They do not generally get into any critical thinking about the Bible - not at the undergrad level anyway. The thinking is all predicated on the assumption that the Bible is infallible. Kind of a critical thinking show stopper. The people who come out of these places and the associated seminaries are not committed to letting the evidence of critical scholarship, archeology and science lead them but preconceived assumptions about the Bible. This is not scholarship but apologetics. Those fundamentalists who were very good scholars and honest with themselves realized this and have given up these assumptions: people like Bart Ehrman, Hector Avalos and John Loftus. Any Christian that considers themselves openminded, should read these three authors.
     
  11. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    This is a very good point. However, an even more difficult point is ... why all the animals??
     
  12. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +5,922
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
    Like you cant comprehend the righteousness and hatred of sin of a Holy God without some personal encounter with His 'otherness'...

    Consider the conversion of Paul... physically blinded for several days - radically changed from murderer to minister...

    He was so impacted by the encounter that he discarded personal interpretation through his vast knowledge of scripture and did not discard the scripture itself, seeing that God has the perogative to act against sin and curruption as He wills - without fault.
     
  13. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +5,922
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
    Who was this question addressed to?
     
  14. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    I think the existence or non-existence of god is impossible to establish. However, unlike the old Vienna School, I don't think the question is meaningless. I also don't think one needs to use a philosophical principle to establish this (like the verification principle that self-destructs on itself), just pragmatic arguments from mathematics and science. To boot, it also conforms to traditional ideas of god predating people like Thomas Aquinas and his god existence arguments. As interesting as all these arguments are, for or against god, I see none as decisive. The logical problem of evil comes the closest, and seems to make the existence of god very unlikely - so the atheists have the edge. Also, everyone is an atheist anyway, except toward their particular belief (if they are religious).
     
  15. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    Sorry, you!
     
  16. Aryeh Jay

    Aryeh Jay Veteran Supporter

    +12,471
    United States
    Married
    Clearly there is some animosity between them.
     
  17. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +30,071
    Anglican
    Married
    Getting back to the OP for a moment...

    Could it be that the "don'ts" simply draw more attention? All Christians know the positive admonitions like loving one's neighbor, forgiving people who have wronged you, and being fair and openminded in social and economic matters.

    These are well-known by Christians, but hardly anyone finds fault with them, so they don't cause nearly as much controversy or hard feelings as some "don'ts" do.
     
  18. Bertrand Russell White

    Bertrand Russell White Active Member

    424
    +73
    Canada
    Skeptic
    Married
    Actually no. Either something is wrong or it is not. If it is wrong, god can't say he is exempt because then it wouldn't be an objective ethical principle. god is not perfectly good if he can change whatever he does to suite himself and still claim things like ethical principles are objective. By this logic, he had no right to pass judgement on Adam and Eve for choosing as they did. So is it objectively right or wrong to mass kill men, women, children and animals. Answer - ..... Most people would say yes it is wrong.
     
  19. seeking.IAM

    seeking.IAM Episcopalian Supporter

    +3,460
    United States
    Anglican
    Married
    Possibly so. But do we have our emphasis in the wrong place?
     
  20. Carl Emerson

    Carl Emerson Well-Known Member

    +5,922
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Married
    Smile...

    The irony is that when I studied the philosophy of science I was told in no uncertain terms that there was no place for absolutes in formal argument.

    You have followed this rule perfectly.

    You cant possibly prove the existence of God using that tool.

    It is not surprising that Jesus requires of us a response from the heart, not the mind.

    It took a long time for Pauls mind to catch up with what had happened in his heart.

    Unless you become as a little Child you cannot enter the Kingdom of God.

    And how can you claim that He requires that ethical principles are 'objective' in fact how would you know if you don't believe He exists?

    Surely you are not suggesting some absolute beyond man???
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...