Question 3

[ianb321red]

So? That doesn't mean science cannot support or explain them.

So you don't understand the limitations of the scientific method then? I think you need to investigate some of the assumptions certain scientific theories rely upon....

That's odd because most studies say atheism is on the increase with theism on the decrease. Your source for this claim?

see my response to Tony Beer http://www.christianforums.com/t7717930-5/#post62273264

What is your source for disagreeing?
And once we've ex-changed sources, who is going to decide who is correct ??

Irrelevant as nobody here has made that claim. Nice strawman, though.

It has - I can dredge up the the permalink if you want..?

It's been done elsewhere several times but if you want to list them I'll happily do so.

Go for it....

 

[MorkandMindy]

...
...

Years ago I was told a lot of convincing things by visiting evangelists, none of which in the end proved to be true.

Evangelists bring people into the churches, the next stage is keeping people in and that is pastoral care.


So I was promised many things by the evangelists:

1. Bible contained a numerical code too complex to have been put there by man but now unravelled by someone who received a Nobel Prize for his work, so if a single word was wrong the sentence would not fit the code and would be clearly faulty so it has been proven not a single word is wrong.

2. God has a wonderful plan for my life, all I need to do is pray the prayer and really mean it and my old life has passed away and I enter a whole new life, eternal life.


Then it was up to the pastoral carers to back pedal on everything I'd been told and substitute things a lot harder to disprove, though also a lot less attractive.

On things that were clearly nonsense like Gen 1, Gen 2 and Noah's Ark I was told not to concentrate on the details but on the bigger picture, and that God had to lie because he was originally explaining it to bronze age shepherds and never thought people like us would come along (it was written for us but not to us). And that multiple theories existed as to how God might have done these things.

Now I know that multiple theories only exist because not one of them actually works.


It might have taken me half a year to get around to disproving all the stuff the evangelist said but as you know the first thing to do with a new Christian is to put them into a church, and churches would not survive if they lost their members, the one thing churches are really good at is holding onto people.

The pastoral care managed to extend my initial disappointment all the way out to ten years.



what can the Bible do to improve my life?

(mumblings about the sermon on the mount... then why not teach about that and that alone? why did I never hear those useful bits, yet I start listening to the Dali Lama and he changes my life with his teachings, he is a thousand times better, the only response the church has to that is to ask me to leave, it is a kind of prison for minds, not a place that likes to hear the truth)

 

[tonybeer]

Well you'd have work back and retrospectively deal with the claimed evidence. So as I'd said to Bungle Bear, firstly who was God the Son?



To be honest, my view on this is limited to a belief in the source and purpose of creation. Outside of God created the universe, every living thing and human beings (in His image) I don't think it possible to biblically conclude anything more than this.

Even amongst Christians we cannot agree on the timing of creation; we can only really agree on the fact of creation.

The exact method of creation is still a moot question since increasingly scientific evidence supports a supernatural creation (see The Mystery Of Life's Origin and Test of FAITH )

My view would be summarised as a belief in:

-a theistic God
-the universe being created ex nihilo
-every living thing created by God
-Adam and Eve were a direct creation by God
-the genesis account was historical, not mythological

Did you watch that Chomsky clip I posted a few days ago?


Why's that? (I'm not challenging what your saying, just asking for more info.)

That would be correct approach to take to begin with, but so far no one in 2000 has ever demonstrated that the bible isn't true or that there are errors of any kind in the original text.

The bible has probably been THE most investigated and analysed text in human history - there is so much at stake to "prove" it is not what it claims to be.

So far it has withstood everything thrown at it....

Science does not increasingly support supernatural creation. I've no idea where you've got that idea from. Your first source is a book written by some nutcase creationists. If you are going to say science increasingly says something then provide a few scientific peer reviewed papers that say this or even better a scientific paper reviewing other papers.

I stand by what I've said about the supernatural. You keep using supernatural to mean two different things - beyond current knowledge and some magic realm that we can't measure.

"No one has proven anything in the bible isn't true"

So you have no problem with talking snakes? People live to hundreds of years old. The Earth gets made before the Sun. Genocide. Adam and Eve. Noah and the global flood. Some guy living inside a whale. I'm not even going to go into the historical inaccuracies.

I thought most Christians had disowned the OT anyways.

Muslims make the same claims about the Koran. It's easy to say one book is true if you don't read any others.

I was actually debating whether I should respond to your last post. I'm not sure we can have a rational discussion when you make false statements and use the kind of links you have as evidence of the scientific consensus.

I know I'm not going to convince you of anything as you have such a deep seated belief system you won't accept anything else. You don't need to be a non Christian to think a lot of what is in the bible can't have been true.

The very fact that there are so many denominations with different beliefs, all using the same book, shows there are issues with it!

 

[Danny777]

Years ago I was told a lot of convincing things by visiting evangelists, none of which in the end proved to be true.

Evangelists bring people into the churches, the next stage is keeping people in and that is pastoral care.


So I was promised many things by the evangelists:

1. Bible contained a numerical code too complex to have been put there by man but now unravelled by someone who received a Nobel Prize for his work, so if a single word was wrong the sentence would not fit the code and would be clearly faulty so it has been proven not a single word is wrong.

2. God has a wonderful plan for my life, all I need to do is pray the prayer and really mean it and my old life has passed away and I enter a whole new life, eternal life.


Then it was up to the pastoral carers to back pedal on everything I'd been told and substitute things a lot harder to disprove, though also a lot less attractive.

On things that were clearly nonsense like Gen 1, Gen 2 and Noah's Ark I was told not to concentrate on the details but on the bigger picture, and that God had to lie because he was originally explaining it to bronze age shepherds and never thought people like us would come along (it was written for us but not to us). And that multiple theories existed as to how God might have done these things.

Now I know that multiple theories only exist because not one of them actually works.


It might have taken me half a year to get around to disproving all the stuff the evangelist said but as you know the first thing to do with a new Christian is to put them into a church, and churches would not survive if they lost their members, the one thing churches are really good at is holding onto people.

The pastoral care managed to extend my initial disappointment all the way out to ten years.



what can the Bible do to improve my life?

(mumblings about the sermon on the mount... then why not teach about that and that alone? why did I never hear those useful bits, yet I start listening to the Dali Lama and he changes my life with his teachings, he is a thousand times better, the only response the church has to that is to ask me to leave, it is a kind of prison for minds, not a place that likes to hear the truth)

Sounds like you were given bad advice to me...

This cliche is often used that God has a wonderful plan for our lives. I would like to ask these "evangelists" which text in the Bible they are using to arrive at that conclusion. I suppose it depends what it meant by wonderful?

When I read the Bible I discover that life will often be very hard for the Christian. Persecution will have to be endured and trying to imitate the perfect life of Jesus Christ will be very difficult. I do look forward to a wonderful plan of eternal life, but this life will be not be easy and it will often not feel "wonderful" by normal human standards!

The teachings of the Bible HAVE dramatically changed my life - if you have found the opposite, it doesn't mean it's wrong for everyone...we are all reading the same text...if you feel the Dali Lama can offer you eternal life then go for it! It's never too late to give the Bible another try though - I would suggest trying to read the Bible without the influence of anyone...everyone has their own agenda when making comments and giving advice (including me!)...it's impossible not too!

John gospel is one of the best places to start...

 

[ianb321red]

Science does not increasingly support supernatural creation. I've no idea where you've got that idea from. Your first source is a book written by some nutcase creationists. If you are going to say science increasingly says something then provide a few scientific peer reviewed papers that say this or even better a scientific paper reviewing other papers.

If you're referring to Charles Thaxton as a nutcase, then why? He is more qualified than you (he has a Phd in Physical Chemistry) Is he a nutcase because he is a Christian? I think you're being a bit harsh to call someone a nutcase when they have the necessary academic qualifications, but hold a different theological or philosophical perspective to you...
If you're referring to the Faraday Institute then these people are significantly more qualified and experienced than you - professors at Cambridge and Oxford, and well respected authors in their own right.

I think you significantly weaken your arguments when you throw around irrational statements like this to be honest...

I stand by what I've said about the supernatural. You keep using supernatural to mean two different things - beyond current knowledge and some magic realm that we can't measure.

Ok, fine - let's park this topic then..

So you have no problem with talking snakes? People live to hundreds of years old. The Earth gets made before the Sun. Genocide. Adam and Eve. Noah and the global flood. Some guy living inside a whale. I'm not even going to go into the historical inaccuracies.

These things are simply very easy to explain logically. I'm not going to write reams and reams on this forum about it. If you genuinely want to understand this further I will happily recommend some further reading/ commentaries on these subjects..

I thought most Christians had disowned the OT anyways.

That's a false assumption and a generalisation...

Muslims make the same claims about the Koran. It's easy to say one book is true if you don't read any others.

This is first and foremost a definite logical fallacy.

But also, do you know what Muslims claim about the Qu'ran?
Have YOU read the entire Qu'ran? Do you understand the relationship between the Qu'ran and the Hadith?
And have you read the entire bible?

I was actually debating whether I should respond to your last post. I'm not sure we can have a rational discussion when you make false statements and use the kind of links you have as evidence of the scientific consensus.

Ok....well I'm glad you managed to get over that and respond

I know I'm not going to convince you of anything as you have such a deep seated belief system you won't accept anything else. You don't need to be a non Christian to think a lot of what is in the bible can't have been true.

Sorry but that's another false assumption about me I'm afraid...

The very fact that there are so many denominations with different beliefs, all using the same book, shows there are issues with it!

Another logical fallacy....

 

[tonybeer]

If you're referring to Charles Thaxton as a nutcase, then why? He is more qualified than you (he has a Phd in Physical Chemistry) Is he a nutcase because he is a Christian? I think you're being a bit harsh to call someone a nutcase when they have the necessary academic qualifications, but hold a different theological or philosophical perspective to you...
If you're referring to the Faraday Institute then these people are significantly more qualified and experienced than you - professors at Cambridge and Oxford, and well respected authors in their own right.

I think you significantly weaken your arguments when you throw around irrational statements like this to be honest...



Ok, fine - let's park this topic then..



These things are simply very easy to explain logically. I'm not going to write reams and reams on this forum about it. If you genuinely want to understand this further I will happily recommend some further reading/ commentaries on these subjects..



That's a false assumption and a generalisation...



This is first and foremost a definite logical fallacy.

But also, do you know what Muslims claim about the Qu'ran?
Have YOU read the entire Qu'ran? Do you understand the relationship between the Qu'ran and the Hadith?
And have you read the entire bible?



Ok....well I'm glad you managed to get over that and respond



Sorry but that's another false assumption about me I'm afraid...



Another logical fallacy....

Charles Thaxton is an intelligent design person. It's not having a different philosophy to me that is the problem, nor being a Christian. There are plenty of reasonable scientists that are also Christians. It is ignoring all of the scientific evidence that causes me to label him that way.

The main problem is you using a book published in 1984 by a fringe group of scientists and saying it reflects "increasing" evidence of a supernatural creator nearly 30 years later.


I have neither read the Koran or the Bible. I have some basic understanding of the bible from school and some of the stories.

I don't think I've made up any stories from the bible to discredit it.

I very much doubt Muslims claim that the Koran isn't true or historically accurate. I'm only going on my own personal experience here, so maybe there are Muslims that claim it is untrue and the bible is the truth.

I'm not a theologian or a philosopher. However if a claim in the bible totally doesn't fit the science I am going to point it out.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I don't see why you separate the 2 things - the bible is The Word of God for Christians.

In my bible it says that in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.

Jesus claimed to be God, and He demonstrated this in a number of ways. If he was NOT God then he was JUST a man the same as everyone else.

The bible being The Word of God tells us everything we know about God; supremely that God The Son walked on this planet as a human being. The way to disprove the existence of God for Christians would be to shown that what we know about Christ's divinity in the bible is wrong.

Any other other arguments using philosophical, logical, scientific reasoning are all well and good but the primary evidence for God comes from what we are told about Christ in the bible.

Proving Jesus was not divine (again, how do you prove a negative?) would not prove that God does not exist.

Shown to wrong by who exactly - Richard Dawkins ??

People a long time before him. Who was Nebuchadnezzar's son?

That's a very grandiose statement, but again you've merely thrown out your opinion without backing it up.

Do you have any examples that are unanimously rejected by Christians??

And of course i expect you realise that unless you apply special pleading then the same accusation could be leveled at non_Christians who chose NOT to accept the evidence for Christianity?

I have just provided evidence. Now let's watch you reject it......

 

[Bungle_Bear]

So you don't understand the limitations of the scientific method then? I think you need to investigate some of the assumptions certain scientific theories rely upon....

If you honestly think science can only support discoveries made by science you have a lot to learn.

It has - I can dredge up the the permalink if you want..?

Yes, please. I'm pretty sure I know which post you're thinking of.....

Go for it....

Where's the list?

 

[MorkandMindy]

Sounds like you were given bad advice to me...

This cliche is often used that God has a wonderful plan for our lives. I would like to ask these "evangelists" which text in the Bible they are using to arrive at that conclusion. I suppose it depends what it meant by wonderful?

When I read the Bible I discover that life will often be very hard for the Christian. Persecution will have to be endured and trying to imitate the perfect life of Jesus Christ will be very difficult. I do look forward to a wonderful plan of eternal life, but this life will be not be easy and it will often not feel "wonderful" by normal human standards!

The teachings of the Bible HAVE dramatically changed my life - if you have found the opposite, it doesn't mean it's wrong for everyone...we are all reading the same text...if you feel the Dali Lama can offer you eternal life then go for it! It's never too late to give the Bible another try though - I would suggest trying to read the Bible without the influence of anyone...everyone has their own agenda when making comments and giving advice (including me!)...it's impossible not too!

John gospel is one of the best places to start...

Thank you for your suggestions. As I mentioned the Evangelists have a mandate to convince people to become Christians and join the churches.

The churches then have to back off from some of the more audacious promises to stop people from reaching the point of leaving in disgust, but still claim there is something of value to be had and then talk at the people once a week from the pulpit to keep them thinking they have something of great value to share with them and get them to keep coming to church every week. Coffee afterword never hurts but by then almost nobody can remember the sermon.


I started in Low Church part of the Anglican Church, did some evangelism in the Methodist Church, attended Catholic Mass a number of times, spent a few years with the Brethren, also attending the local Free Evangelical and found dispensationalism was not a workable theology.

When I moved I then attended the local High Church, and then where I worked next it was the local Traditionalist Anglican Church and a house church as well. Obviously I'd been to a few Baptist Churches, and finally I spent 5 years in an Evangelical Free.

(Don't confuse Evangelical Free with Free Evangelical unless you want to look like a total idiot).

I wondered if I was going to have to attend every type of church, and I still had well over a hundred to go.




I eventually decided it was a bit like this:

They said it was 'orange', I eventually found it wasn't,
but I found another church that said it was yellow and green, so I went there and found it wasn't green, so I went to one that said it was yellow and it wasn't, and so on...

Basically all 150 denominations or whatever can't agree on what colour it is. The reason for the dispute is that none of them are willing to admit they can't actually see the Emperor's New Clothes.

The eyes of faith don't give you back any more than you put in.

 

[MorkandMindy]

(mumblings about the sermon on the mount... then why not teach about that and that alone? why did I never hear those useful bits, yet I start listening to the Dali Lama and he changes my life with his teachings, he is a thousand times better, the only response the church has to that is to ask me to leave, it is a kind of prison for minds, not a place that likes to hear the truth)

...

The teachings of the Bible HAVE dramatically changed my life - if you have found the opposite, it doesn't mean it's wrong for everyone...we are all reading the same text...if you feel the Dali Lama can offer you eternal life then go for it! ...

I didn't say the Dali Lama offered eternal life. But one talk by him changed my life in a beneficial way a lot more than 10 years of Christianity did, hence my estimate that he is a thousand times better.


He would deny that because he thinks the best of all religions and of all people, and to an extent I would have to agree with him on that.

I agree because I've met many fine Christians and people trying very hard to get their faith to work and to make sense of the Bible. I tried very hard and disputed with another guy I knew for years who followed his Scofield Study Bible on everything. In the end I had to agree that as bad as his Dispensational Theology was, my Covenant Theology wasn't any better. If there as a good theology it would have a church that followed it and together they would grow and gain adherents. But there is no single correct theology. Or to put it differently, no one can make sense of the Bible.

And rather than blame the imperfect minds of everyone on the planet down through all the ages, I think it is possible that the Bible simply isn't coherent.

 

[Danny777]

Thank you for your suggestions. As I mentioned the Evangelists have a mandate to convince people to become Christians and join the churches.

The churches then have to back off from some of the more audacious promises to stop people from reaching the point of leaving in disgust, but still claim there is something of value to be had and then talk at the people once a week from the pulpit to keep them thinking they have something of great value to share with them and get them to keep coming to church every week. Coffee afterword never hurts but by then almost nobody can remember the sermon.


I started in Low Church part of the Anglican Church, did some evangelism in the Methodist Church, attended Catholic Mass a number of times, spent a few years with the Brethren, also attending the local Free Evangelical and found dispensationalism was not a workable theology.

When I moved I then attended the local High Church, and then where I worked next it was the local Traditionalist Anglican Church and a house church as well. Obviously I'd been to a few Baptist Churches, and finally I spent 5 years in an Evangelical Free.

(Don't confuse Evangelical Free with Free Evangelical unless you want to look like a total idiot).

I wondered if I was going to have to attend every type of church, and I still had well over a hundred to go.




I eventually decided it was a bit like this:

They said it was 'orange', I eventually found it wasn't,
but I found another church that said it was yellow and green, so I went there and found it wasn't green, so I went to one that said it was yellow and it wasn't, and so on...

Basically all 150 denominations or whatever can't agree on what colour it is. The reason for the dispute is that none of them are willing to admit they can't actually see the Emperor's New Clothes.

The eyes of faith don't give you back any more than you put in.

You have obviously seen the best and worst of the church landscape.

I personally am not a big fan of the "visible" church. I really do not care for church politics, denominations, retention rate etc etc...The church usually leaves me disappointed and disillusioned. As a follower of Christ I need to have a source of authority to learn about Christ. For me, my ONLY source of authority is the Bible and NOT the church. I do attend a church and there are things about my church that are both good and bad. However my final authority is the Bible itself, not the churches interpretation of the Bible.

 

[MorkandMindy]

You have obviously seen the best and worst of the church landscape.

I personally am not a big fan of the "visible" church. I really do not care for church politics, denominations, retention rate etc etc...The church usually leaves me disappointed and disillusioned. As a follower of Christ I need to have a source of authority to learn about Christ. For me, my ONLY source of authority is the Bible and NOT the church. I do attend a church and there are things about my church that are both good and bad. However my final authority is the Bible itself, not the churches interpretation of the Bible.

I reached the conclusion I think a lot of people are at, just that Christianity doesn't work.

 

[ConfuseddotCom]

I reached the conclusion I think a lot of people are at, just that Christianity doesn't work.

What led you to that conclusion?

 

[MorkandMindy]

What led you to that conclusion?

Really the point Danny made, that the whole 'visible' church is a disaster. All are Christians yet behaviour is no better than the World at large. If you ask the question 'does the Bible work' then you might hope to be given examples where it has, and there are a few, but more where it doesn't but actually seems to make things worse.

Statistically as you go from States in the US where church attendance is lower and those who do go are Catholic or liberal Protestant, to those where it is higher and more Bible-believing, the crime rates and divorce rates rise in proportion to church attendance.


The reason I think is because the Bible allows people to separate other people into good and bad and to dehumanise people by saying certain ones are of the devil, dehumanising or forming others into a group distinct from yourself is necessary to justify doing evil to another. I am fairly confident that although Adolf Hitler was not a conforming Christian, that his background and the many Christians with him were thinking in that way when involved in persecution.

Another reason is if you read the Bible there really is a lot of killing in it. The Noah Flood is killing 99.999% of everyone and everything on the planet, there is the killing of the first born, total genocide in the Promised Land runs through the books of Joshua and Judges, and before then the chosen people have their own cleansing: Then he said to them, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbour.’”Eventually Jerusalem gets trashed and heaps of the 'chosen people' killed, all by God's will. Most of the planet survives but God takes care of that in Revelation.

The sections about killing are extensive and specific, the bits about salvation are less so and vague, so that Christians today are still left arguing about whether works are needed for salvation or not, and so on. I find it impossible to believe that a benevolent supernatural being would be the author of such a nasty mixed up book.

 

[Danny777]

Really the point Danny made, that the whole 'visible' church is a disaster. All are Christians yet behaviour is no better than the World at large. If you ask the question 'does the Bible work' then you might hope to be given examples where it has, and there are a few, but more where it doesn't but actually seems to make things worse.

Statistically as you go from States in the US where church attendance is lower and those who do go are Catholic or liberal Protestant, to those where it is higher and more Bible-believing, the crime rates and divorce rates rise in proportion to church attendance.


The reason I think is because the Bible allows people to separate other people into good and bad and to dehumanise people by saying certain ones are of the devil, dehumanising or forming others into a group distinct from yourself is necessary to justify doing evil to another. I am fairly confident that although Adolf Hitler was not a conforming Christian, that his background and the many Christians with him were thinking in that way when involved in persecution.

Another reason is if you read the Bible there really is a lot of killing in it. The Noah Flood is killing 99.999% of everyone and everything on the planet, there is the killing of the first born, total genocide in the Promised Land runs through the books of Joshua and Judges, and before then the chosen people have their own cleansing: Then he said to them, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbour.’”Eventually Jerusalem gets trashed and heaps of the 'chosen people' killed, all by God's will. Most of the planet survives but God takes care of that in Revelation.

The sections about killing are extensive and specific, the bits about salvation are less so and vague, so that Christians today are still left arguing about whether works are needed for salvation or not, and so on. I find it impossible to believe that a benevolent supernatural being would be the author of such a nasty mixed up book.

I completely agree with most of what you say. The world we live in is a complete mess and for the most-past the "visible" church is also a mess. I don't think you can correlate any of Hitler's actions with the Christian faith though - whether or not he had a Catholic influence around him is irrelevant...he was an aggressive atheist who attempted to play "survival of the fittest" to its natural conclusion. The teachings of Jesus Christ are completely opposed to the philosophy and actions of Hitler...

For me, it all comes down to what you believe about the identity and claims of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ claimed to be the only Saviour of mankind, the creator of the world, equal with God, the Messiah etc etc. If you believe the gospels, Jesus demonstrated these claims with miracles, sinless life and ultimately by His resurrection from death. No other person in history has any parallel.

If you reject His claims, then that is fine and the Christian faith is not for you - however, IF Jesus claims are true, eternal life is only available through Him.

I believe it is a mistake to judge Jesus Christ on the actions of a corrupted worldwide church. I'm not prepared to gamble my eternal destiny on this, when Jesus claims are so clear and exclusive...

For me, the church is irrelevant...anyone can read the account of and claims of Jesus Christ - I try to read these accounts without the influence of anyone...only then, can a personal decision be made...

The claims of Jesus Christ - The Truth of Judgment Day

 

[MorkandMindy]

I reached the conclusion I think a lot of people are at, just that Christianity doesn't work.

What led you to that conclusion?

My apologies to any Christians reading this, So I'll reply in white on white and you will have to deliberately take the text and paste it into a word processor to read it or something to read it, my advice is don't read it; it is for ConfuseddotCom.

It appears to be the majority opinion here on CF that it is the church that turns people off God. I've certainly found that to be true and if you consider the major scandals that have taken top evangelists; Jimmy Swaggart may have been the World's top evangelist when he was got for prostitution and then after the scandal he was caught by the police with a prostitute in his car. Ted Haggard founder the very successful New Life Church for homosexual relationships and illegal drugs. And it is no different if you go back in history.


Accepting that the Church on Earth is a failure is a very serious admission.

Suppose someone is offering a muscle building drink.

You ask him how it is working and he says 'not so well, not well at all really' and points to people who have collapsed and a few who are still walking around but certainly not muscular.

But he quickly points out, the ones who have died are really strong and fit up in heaven.

He hurriedly claims that the drink was endorsed by God and it won't cost you anything except you'll have to devote your entire life to God in gratitude if you expect it to work.

And that you really ought to buy it unless you can prove that God doesn't exist and didn't endorse it.


I wouldn't bother.

 

[MorkandMindy]

But you can all have a lovely picture instead:

 

[Danny777]

My apologies to any Christians reading this, So I'll reply in white on white and you will have to deliberately take the text and paste it into a word processor to read it or something to read it, my advice is don't read it; it is for ConfuseddotCom.

It appears to be the majority opinion here on CF that it is the church that turns people off God. I've certainly found that to be true and if you consider the major scandals that have taken top evangelists; Jimmy Swaggart may have been the World's top evangelist when he was got for prostitution and then after the scandal he was caught by the police with a prostitute in his car. Ted Haggard founder the very successful New Life Church for homosexual relationships and illegal drugs. And it is no different if you go back in history.


Accepting that the Church on Earth is a failure is a very serious admission.

Suppose someone is offering a muscle building drink.

You ask him how it is working and he says 'not so well, not well at all really' and points to people who have collapsed and a few who are still walking around but certainly not muscular.

But he quickly points out, the ones who have died are really strong and fit up in heaven.

He hurriedly claims that the drink was endorsed by God and it won't cost you anything except you'll have to devote your entire life to God in gratitude if you expect it to work.

And that you really ought to buy it unless you can prove that God doesn't exist and didn't endorse it.


I wouldn't bother.

Hi...

Admitting that the church is a mess isn't just a serious admission - its an honest admission. The Bible (NT) consistently warns that this would be the case so it is no surprise to me. What is be better to deny this is the case and be accused of not living in the real world?

Your analogy with a sports drink does not stand up at all. Christianity is not some "product" for our consumption and enjoyment.

We will all die one day and cannot escape the effects of death - the big question for everyone is what happens next. Jesus Christ claimed many things and among them that He is the ONLY way to eternal life. We can all clearly read these claims in the gospel accounts. Either Jesus was right or He was wrong. The actions of Christians or churches who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus is completely irrelevant to the validity of Jesus claims in my opinion.

You have to answer the question of eternal life for yourself - you will confront the issue of death one day just like I will. For me, it does not matter at all how bad the church acts although it obviously disappoints me. I believe I will one day die and that my ticket to eternal life is only through Jesus. This is because I have examined the life and claims of Jesus and decided I accept His claims and call to follow Him. Muscle building drinks are not needed - an answer to the question of death is needed. I will not allow the conduct of the church to distract me from the belief that Jesus was who He said He was as I believe my eternal security will depend on it...

(I hope you don't mind me responding - your post came through on my phone and was not hidden in white text!)

 

[MorkandMindy]

I would like people to have a religion that works, I know a lot about Christianity and very little about any other religion so that would be my choice. But Bible centred Christianity doesn't work.

It isn't ancient Christianity either, it was up to various meetings to decide what was going into the canon and what wasn't. A few people were credited with the great wisdom of backing certain collections of books but if the great meetings had chosen otherwise those patriarchs wouldn't be patriarchs and it would be some guys from the other side instead. Sorry to post and run but I'll be at work till Sat afternoon now.

Admitting that the church is a mess isn't just a serious admission - its an honest admission. The Bible (NT) consistently warns that this would be the case so it is no surprise to me. What is be better to deny this is the case and be accused of not living in the real world?

If it's adherents can't get it to work then who can?

 

[ianb321red]

If it's adherents can't get it to work then who can?

I think the point that Danny is making is that the church won't be fixed until Christ returns. We are clearly told this in the bible, and this is one of the key eschatological warning signs. The below video clip covers this whole topic very well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpoM1DsM2Tw

All of this is a good thing because it means that people come to Christ because of Christ Himself, NOT because of the church or the Christian religion.

If someone is truly and sincerely seeking fellowship with God then they will overcome the (in my mind) the obvious shortcomings we see in so many churches and the Christian religion, and find the real truth they are seeking which is found in Christ alone..