New and bemused

Hi there

Interesting that you should find the Christian account juvenile. I can see that it might appear that way - I think that it can be understood on many levels. For example, the first chapter of Genesis could seem juvenile, however it can be understood on a basic level by a child or anyone. That is not to say that it is not a lot, lot more complex once you start looking into it.
I believe that the Bible is many layered but the basic truth and message is easy enough to understand whatever one's intellectual or level of maturity. Jesus said that one has to become as a little child to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And the Holy Spirit leads us into more and deeper understanding and into a deeper and closer relationship with God through Jesus.

Anyhow, hope you enjoy it here and you will perhaps get good answers for some of your questions or points of dicussion

Surskit said:

First off, hello everyone. My name is Ryan and I came here looking for what everyone is: answers. Of course I don't expect it to be anything so straightforward but I suppose that will become clear by the end of my introduction. I also consider myself to be ignorant of many things and plebeian at best on anything scientific or philosophical.

I've grown up in a loosely catholic family with some Cuban Santeria thrown into the mix. The two don't mix as well as the syncretism would have you believe and took on an atheistic mindset at an early age.

In my early adult life, however, I took a recreational interest in philosophy and after binging on a 50 hour audio book, learned the orators final track was making a case for God. I can't tell you how much respect I had for this man's intelligence by the end of the book, but I couldn't understand his position on God (it was Daniel N Robinson if you're interested).

Well life continued, found a wife who was baptist and didn't want to pressure me into religion, but now I sit here pondering: why don't I believe? And even as I sit in the pews and hear the testimonies I just feel that line in the sand emboldening.

Whenever I try to compromise with the Bible, it's never without strong reservations; to the point that at most I could only accept that should a God exist, the Christian account feels juvenile. But at the same time, I can't find any more or less truth in any other account.

I know, it would make my wife the happiest woman in the world to see me saved, but not only would it be a lie for me to claim I believe, but disrespectful to everyone who does.

So, I'm here to see why people believe. As Robinson explains philosophy "The bottom line in philosophy is not to solve practical problems; it's not to solidify the civic bonds among people; it's not to make us feel better, or worse. Rather it is to test the most fundamental values and convictions we have, and to test them for the purpose of getting them right. While at the same time, realizing that basic questions as to what it could mean to get it right are often finally unanswerable. "

Click to expand...

Hello Surskit,

Welcome to CF! If you're having struggles reconciling 'the Bible' with what you perceive to be reality, I'd suggest (...and I do mean this to be a friendly suggestsion...) that you grapple with the idea that Christianity isn't necessarily meant to be a monolithic worldview, even though there is a common core of basic beliefs that all Christians should, to some extent, assent to. Philosophically speaking, this means there are various modes and approaches by which you can explore the Christian faith and it doesn't necessarily have to look like your wife's Baptist beliefs in order to be 'Christian.'

These are just some introductory thoughts, and I'm glad you've joined us to 'search out strange new worlds' with us ....

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

Surskit said:

Hi Tansy! Thanks for the reply. I wanted to be succinct with my feelings towards Christianity and thought that was the best way to describe it. The best way I can surmise my experience other than that, is my time at church feels like I'm trying to guilted, scared, or bought into it. I can agree with most virtues, but for the sake of virtue, and not as a bartering chip. One of the the things that run me the wrong way most is when the old men say how they'll be in their gold mansions on heaven Ave. At first it was a bit charming but the persistence of the joke and further discussion gives me the impression of some perverse twist on it all. Thusly, I'm resolute in not letting emotions dictate my acceptance or rejection of it, and I'm looking beyond the church for something that resonates more with the image of Heaven I've constructed. Maybe therein lies the problem. But I need to see other ideals that make mine feel inadequate.

Click to expand...

Hm, yes, I see what you mean! I would say, ask God to show you the truth...that's what I did. (though not being sure whether or not He existed or which religion, philosophy etc may or may not be true...if any. I just thought if He exists and He's a good God, then He would show me...and I was willing to go by what I was shown and if He didn't show me anything, then I would conclude that He didnt exist. I also knew there was not enough time in a lifetime to actually work through all religions, all philosophies etc to see if any were right.)
There was somewhat more to all of this than I'm recounting, but I'm not going to write a whole essay LOL.

Would you let us know what image of heaven you've constructed? Maybe start a new thread...perhaps in Exploring Christianity. People may be able to discuss with you better when we know even more where you're coming from.

I have to go to bed shortly, it's late and I'm tired, but I look forward to seeing more of your posts

Perhaps you should step beyond the bible and see evidence of the real existence of Christ.
Take a right angle view.

Take.
I don't know what you know of the shroud of turin but several things are definitively true.
1/ The cloth tells the story of the passion of christ, in all its gory detail - showing pre and post mortem pathology
2/ Despite the hype, in populist media, It is not a piece of art , there is no trace of paint, the mark is a shallow oxidation the result of a rapid scorch, and could not have been created in mediaeval times

3/ The RC date now proven false - not that it can ever have been true - there was too much evidence against mediaeval.
4/several chemical dating tests put it in the first century
5/anothe cloth "the sudarium of oviedo" ( whose provable chain of custody is far older than shroud) - a face cloth wrapped around the head, shows massive forensic correspondence.

But heres the kicker.
The ONLY way that the mark has EVER been reproduced (ie very shallow oxidation, is either UV laser or high voltage corona discharge.

And with 3D distortion similar to the shroud, only corona discharge has done this.

So the question to set you thinking is, why should a dead body suddenly produce massive levels of radiation?
http://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2015/02/shsconf_atsi2014_00003.pdf

Now skip through the bible to just one section.
John 6:53 where christ tells us to "eat his body" "drink his blood", and the revelation of what that meant in terms of bread and wine in the eucharist.

Now check out the eucharistic miracles of such as tixtla, legnica, sokolka, buenos aires.
And see bread that mutated into a red substance that (many) credible forensic laboratories determined was living heart myocardium.

Not so puerile then...
At least food for thought...

Not all christians believe in either, but all that disagree will find it hard to discount forensic evidence.

So a truly right angles view of your question.
And the journey of discovery might crystallize your views.

Surskit said:

First off, hello everyone. My name is Ryan and I came here looking for what everyone is: answers. Of course I don't expect it to be anything so straightforward but I suppose that will become clear by the end of my introduction. I also consider myself to be ignorant of many things and plebeian at best on anything scientific or philosophical.

I've grown up in a loosely catholic family with some Cuban Santeria thrown into the mix. The two don't mix as well as the syncretism would have you believe and took on an atheistic mindset at an early age.

In my early adult life, however, I took a recreational interest in philosophy and after binging on a 50 hour audio book, learned the orators final track was making a case for God. I can't tell you how much respect I had for this man's intelligence by the end of the book, but I couldn't understand his position on God (it was Daniel N Robinson if you're interested).

Well life continued, found a wife who was baptist and didn't want to pressure me into religion, but now I sit here pondering: why don't I believe? And even as I sit in the pews and hear the testimonies I just feel that line in the sand emboldening.

Whenever I try to compromise with the Bible, it's never without strong reservations; to the point that at most I could only accept that should a God exist, the Christian account feels juvenile. But at the same time, I can't find any more or less truth in any other account.

I know, it would make my wife the happiest woman in the world to see me saved, but not only would it be a lie for me to claim I believe, but disrespectful to everyone who does.

So, I'm here to see why people believe. As Robinson explains philosophy "The bottom line in philosophy is not to solve practical problems; it's not to solidify the civic bonds among people; it's not to make us feel better, or worse. Rather it is to test the most fundamental values and convictions we have, and to test them for the purpose of getting them right. While at the same time, realizing that basic questions as to what it could mean to get it right are often finally unanswerable. "

Click to expand...

Hi there. Welcome. I hope you enjoy your time on CF.Have a great day.

Hi Ryan... Welcome to CF! I just wanted to say that I'm glad you've joined us.

Surskit said:

Hi Tansy! Thanks for the reply. I wanted to be succinct with my feelings towards Christianity and thought that was the best way to describe it. The best way I can surmise my experience other than that, is my time at church feels like I'm trying to be guilted, scared, or bought into it. I can agree with most virtues, but for the sake of virtue, and not as a bartering chip. One of the the things that rub me the wrong way most is when the old men say how they'll be in their gold mansions on heaven Ave. At first it was a bit charming but the persistence of the joke and further discussion gives me the impression of some perverse twist on it all. Thusly, I'm resolute in not letting emotions dictate my acceptance or rejection of it, and I'm looking beyond the church for something that resonates more with the image of Heaven I've constructed. Maybe therein lies the problem. But I need to see other ideals that make mine feel inadequate.

Click to expand...

Hi Surskit welcome .. Very well worded and honest posts .. I can relate to where you are but I'll add that being a Christian for about 40 years now I am free to do anything I want, it just so happens that I agree with what Jesus taught and did .. I don't have to keep up any image to please anyone .. I'm also free to experience my emotions as I see fit .. I am completely free from any religion except that I've thrown in with Christ and he is my Lord .. If the Lord convicts you and calls you don't be afraid to go for it .. As far as golden streets and pearly gates in heaven I'm like you , it will be nice but I'm most looking forward to living eternal in the presence of God .. Everything else will just be icing on the cake ..

Hi Ryan & welcome to CF!

Hi, Ryan. For me, it all turns on believing (or not) the Bible. Is it credible? You said that you have a hard time accepting it, but that's still where the rubber meets the road with this matter, as far as I'm concerned.

That said, what Tansy wrote in post #2 seemed very good. We are able to discern, particularly with study, meaning upon meaning, levels of meaning, and so on. We take that for granted when we are studying ordinary classics of literature, but when it comes to the Bible....

Then, it seems, many people approach it like it's a textbook that's written in an absolutely literal, one dimensional format. They allow nothing to be a turn of phrase, an idiom, a generalization, or a double entendre.

As with a lot of other wisdom we encounter in our lives, understanding the Bible takes more than that.

I don't expect to convince you.

Only show you the start of a journey of study, that leads a questioning mind inexorably to the possibility it is all true,

There is an interesting effect discovered in the 19the century in optics called the purkinje Samson effect.
Triple reflections are observed in the eye.

How was it that an image of the 16th century - the image of Guadalupe - was found to contain it by a scientist called tonsmann who analysed the picture with image analysis software a few decades ago. It cannot be fake, because no artist then would have known how to fake it, But then how did cactus fibre survive hundredscof years anyway? It should have fallen apart in years. What preserves it?

But when it comes to images of Mary what was it witnessed by millions of all walks of life at a suburb of Cairo called zeitoun. It remains to this day impossible to fake a projected 3D real image. Holography cannot do that. And in order to try to expose a fake, the authorities turned electricity off in that suburb. The glowing , hovering , moving,image of the Lady at prayer remained regardless.

Mary has often appeared throughout history giving dire warnings, such as the rivers of blood of the genocide of Rwanda , foretold by our lady of kibeho.
Nobody can read books such as " left to tell" without seeing the hand of divine providence.

There was a fascinating bust of Jesus, at a Bolivian village called Cochabamba that began weep and bleed on camera and show all the marks of the crucifixion. Forensic examination not only showed it was real blood , but also it contained epithelial ( skin cells) with trauma biochemistry, and a dark object analysed showed thecpathology of thorn cells unique to holy land. CAT scans proved there were no hidden tubes or holes through which blood and tears could pass. Yet the passage of blood and tears was observed in camera in real time.

But showing the marks of the crucifixion has been observed in real time on camera on a live human being ( the so called stigmata) . the stigmata of katya Rivas was not only prophesied, and entirely caught on film, but she did what no plastic surgeon could do. Medically observed wounds healed completely within 24 hours. How?

But then how did that peasant - Katya Rivas - write entire books in languages she did not know, with perfect theology - never pausing, writing continuously for hours, never a crossing out, pause for ideas, with perfect grammar. No author can do this.
Read them. They are fascinating books, English translations are free to download
Her case is not unique. Stigmatist and peasant Therese Neumann spoke ancient languages fluently that she was never taught,


It could be written off as delusional when a bed ridden nun described the life of Jesus and Mary in minute detail, her name Anne Catherine emmerich. If it was delusional how is it Anne Catherine described the last house of Mary on a very remote hillside in Ephesus, with peculiar architecture ( e.g. Octagonal back) and a unique view of both sea , islands and Ephesus., in such detail that the ruin was found from her description, called " panaghia capouli " " miryamana evi" . Now a shrine. But the kicker is, it was only on excavation that they found the unique architecture buried. The nun had seen it as it was two millennia before, long since buried. Simple question how? Nobody observing the ruin at the time she described it could have described what she saw.


And so on.
The list is endless.

But bread becomes flesh is unique to Christian faith.

And forensic labs , whose day job is crinimial evidence, say it has happened in the Eucharistic miracles I mention. If you accept the forensic evidence, there can be no other explanation than the objective reality of Christianity,

Christianity is not just a very old puerile book.

Surskit said:

I looked into the cloth because of your post. It's really interesting, is definitely good for thought, but it's still not enough to convince me of Christianity. Definitely something within the realm of super natural, though.

Those other miracles you mentioned I'll have to look more into. Thanks for the direction, though.

Click to expand...

Welcome to CF! I pray you find what you are looking for my friend.

Hi and welcome to C F

Surskit said:

Yeah that's exactly my point though! What was it that made people accept it?

Click to expand...

I didn't get from the previous post that this was your question. No matter, the reason people are persuaded by the Bible is that it chronicles, with history, geography, and more, the history of a people leading up to the life of Christ. Specifics that can be challenged.

Those accounts have been challenged by skeptics again and again over the centuries, and they always stood up to the doubts. So if that persuades you, I think that's a reason to believe its story. Compare that with the sacred texts of most other of the world's great religions and you'll note that they are mainly a lot of advice or comments about some idea of a God...nothing like the Bible.