What do you do when you don't believe any more?

[IndyEllis]

IndyEllis,
Read your Mithras articles, and then some more.

Wasn't really "my" article.

I think all of us, at times, have struggled with doubt.

I generally have felt a couple different types of doubt over the decades of being a Christian.

The first is kind of this "God have mercy; I am not worthy." I don't have enough faith. (Therefore I am not at peace, am susceptible to sin, my prayers go unheard, etc.) I don't follow his word in action. (Therefore I am not at peace, ...) This was all about me and my faults. All about my "heart" as well as my mind.

The second kind of doubt seemed to be, well, outside of me. Less associated with my "heart" but certainly with my mind. Like the parallels between the stories of the OT and other Mesopotamian myths and legends or even between Christ himself and the stories of Mithras or Horus or Dionysus. Or the conflicts between the stories of the OT and scientific evidence. Or the discrepencies between this piece of scripture or that piece of scripture. Or the the fact that modern [American, conservative, Protestant] Christian values, lived by many, have numerous differences with the actual commands of the Bible (that is if one actually reads it).

I would guess I have probably heard two thousand sermons over my life so far. I can't think of one that ever acknowledged the existence, the possibility of the later category of doubt. Almost as if it was all tried to be "put in the best light possible." Almost as if the answers were offered though the questions were not really supposed to be asked. Almost as if my sunday school teachers and pastors weren't that familiar with this kind of stuff, or intentionally didn't want me to know.

I struggle understanding why that is.

Not a single "how the Christian story is materially different from myth and legend and here's why you should believe" sermon.

Thinking it over, there are probably still more ancient legends or myths about people coming to life again.

You used two very interesting words in that sentence and may have almost answered your question yourself. The two words you used are legend and myth.

A legend (Latin, legenda, "things to be read") is a narrative of human actions that are perceived both by teller and listeners to take place within human history and to possess certain qualities that give the tale verisimilitude [the state or quality of something that exhibits the appearance of truth or reality]. Legend, for its active and passive participants, includes no happenings that are outside the realm of "possibility", defined by a highly flexible set of parameters, which may include miracles that are perceived as actually having happened, within the specific tradition of indoctrination where the legend arises, and within which it may be transformed over time, in order to keep it fresh and vital, and realistic.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legend

And it continues...

Hippolyte Delehaye, (in his Preface to The Legends of the Saints: An Introduction to Hagiography, 1907) distinguished legend from myth: "The legend, on the other hand, has, of necessity, some historical or topographical connection. It refers imaginary events to some real personage, or it localizes romantic stories in some definite spot."

Simply, legends do a better job than myths at anchoring in place and time and are thus more rationally believable. (Note however that believable and truly true remain as very separate items.)

Hindu myhtology, for instance, has stories about about Ganesh being brought back to life; and Satyavan, husband of Savitri returning from the dead.

And thus it is called mythology rather than legends. Here in the West, Zeus is a myth. Alexander the Great has many legends associated with him. As do George Washington and Daniel Boone here specifically in the US. Legends are much better anchored in place, in time.

However, I syill think there is a difference between these stories and Jesus' resurrection.

Very much so.

They are fairly obviously myths, with no attempt to place them in a time frame, or historical setting.

You nailed it. They're myths.

They have some kind of geographical setting, sometimes, but thats all.

Indeed.

Also, the tales are very vividly coloured with a strong bizarre element which precludes literal belief.

Yep.

Ganesh, for instance, is the son of Parvati, created from the dust of her body.

Are you suggesting it is hard to believe someone was created from the dust?

She sets him to guard her door while she bathes.

As every good Indian boy knows.

He refuses admission to her husband, Shiva, which enrages Shiva so much that he brings a lot of gods and chariots, and finally knocks off Ganesh's head.

Father kills son. What kind of values are those?

All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. - Leviticus 20:9

I struggle understanding how that command was ever given by the God I ever followed.

Parvati is enraged and to placate her, Shiva orders that his servants bring the head of the first creature they find. They find an elephant and bring back his head, so Ganesh is "re-born" with an elephant's head.

And father brings son back to life. However since they are more separate gods in the Hindu tradition there's not this other challenge that we have in Christianity. Specifically, how exactly was Jesus (who is God) dead and the Father (who is God) being alive bring back to life Jesus (who is God)?

I have struggled getting my head wrapped around the Trinity without commiting any defined heresy. It almost seems mythical.

Anyhow, back to Ganapati.

The significance of this story to Hindus would not be in the literal truth of this tale, but that Ganesh is faithful, helpful, (he is revered as the "remover of obstacles") intelligent (thats why he has a large head), light-footed and light-hearted (he rides a mouse) ...and so on.

And that is the nature of belief based in myticism.

Jesus' resurrection, though, is quite different.

Indeed so and in many ways.

Apart from the admittedly fantastic coming to life of a dead body, the rest is so down-to-earth, so realistic.

But isn't part of what makes a "legend" the fact that just one or two things are stretched from the everyday believable?

"Fantastic" is an interesting word. With fantasy meaning...

The power of the mind to form images...

Any fictitious idea accepted as part of an ideology by an uncritical group; a received idea...

As someone said it, or remmebered it.

As if someone said it. Sigh.

The gospels even record the part of Mary's eyes brimming over, as she looks in to the cave, of John and Peter running to the grave, when the women say it is empty, and John running faster than Peter, but stopping, a little intimidated by death, as a young person would be, outside; while Peter, spontanous as ever, rushes in when he reaches.

Which Mary are you referring to? Mary Magdalene? Or Mary, the mother of James?

There are a few differences between the gospel accounts on what exactly went down at the tomb. Much has been written on this over the centuries but an intro to the discrouse might be:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_tomb

With something more aggresive such as Peter Kirby.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/peter_kirby/tomb/index.shtml

A rebuttal, illustrating the "other side."

http://www.geocities.com/metacrock2000/Jesus_pages/refute_kirby.html

They see the cloths..and they wonder. And they go away. It just seems so.... different. From the old tales, certainly.

It is very different.

I have a son who is in 6th grade. Here in the US, that means about 12 years of age.

Naturally they teach kids writing. Writers are taught, even at this early age, to add details to heighten realism. Here is an example rubric for grading the stories of sixth graders.

http://www.sandi.net/depts/literacy/rubrics/6_writing.pdf

In the narrative form, the advanced 12 year old:

Skillfully combines story elements around a controllingidea to reveal a thought-provoking theme

Skillfully develops a plot/situation, characters and setting

Provides anecdotes, sensory details and examples skillfully create a clear sense of characters’ thoughts, actions and appearances

and on.

I wonder if you get what i mean?

I do get what you mean. There is a big difference between myth and legend and as legends anchor better in place and time they are more rationally believable.

Just that believability and truth are not the same.

 

[IndyEllis]

Interesting response to the question on the difference between philosophy and religion.

Does this mean our entire discussion has been more of a philosophical discussion? It seems to me we are wrestling with a question that may never be answered, i.e. what evidence is there for the existense of God?

As for the definition of religion, for some people that definition is probably very accurate. But, I think for many people, the philosophy viewpoint is what we struggle with at least once or twice in our life.

Changing the subject (note the smooth transition ), I was in the public library and thought of you when I saw a book I read a few years ago. It is entitled, "Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?". It is a debate between William Lane Craig and John Crossan. Have you read it? If so, what did you think of it? If you haven't read it, see if you can find a copy. I enjoyed it simply because it was a discussion by two theologians.

Granted, there are those who would label Crossan as more of a heretic or blasphemer rather than a theologian, but I see Crossan as a theologian.

I will be out of town for a few days and the laptop given to me by my new employer allows me to see this website, but the icons for doing a response do not appear even when I move the cursor over the area where they should be. So please do not think I am ignoring you.

May your days be filled with joy.

As always,

OldChurchGuy

No, our discussion has been about religion. Just that I have been asking the questions that I've felt for years you weren't supposed to ask.

I've not read that Craig/Crossnan book though I've read a couple Craig essays. Doubt I'll get to it here soon. My reading right now is about 50% Bible and 50% non-apologetic Christian authors.

Enjoy your travels.

Incrementally my days are being more filled with joy. This has been a very difficult process to say the least. It has been the biggest struggle of my life.

 

[IndyEllis]

Back to my OP...

So I guess my question is, what do you do with stuff you don't have evidence for? How can you believe something as truth when it just as easily (perhaps even more so per Occam's Razor) could have been just made up a really long time again and incrementally added to and adjusted to suit the times at hand?

Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling… ~ Philippians 2:12

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. ~ 2 Timothy 4:3

Blessed is the man who finds wisdom, the man who gains understanding, ~ Proverbs 3:13

Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, [a] get understanding. ~ Proverbs 4:7

Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life. ~ Proverbs 4:23

Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. ~ Hebrews 13:9a

"How long will you simple ones love your simple ways? How long will mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge? ~ Proverbs 1:22

A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. ~ Proverbs 18:2

"Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd, ~ Exodus 23:2a

I'd be interested in some more ideas. Though it's starting to settle on me, I haven't really liked being a disbeliever. Anathema is the word that comes to mind.

But then again, maybe I might be the first Atheist (gulp, that's the first time, other than that checkbox when I registered for this site, I've ever referred to myself by that ugly label) you've ever had compassion for, and maybe understood just a bit.

Or maybe not.

I appreciate everyone's help and interest.

 

[stutiw]

You have come a long way and studied a lot. Belief comes from your heart, you dont need evidence, There are other interpretations and books you read, you feel good for a while, but really did you ask Holy Spirit for the guidance before reading books?

For my Faith I dont need evidence, cause I see evidence every day in my life through the way God comes with his word so clearly. Once upon a time, I knew there were so many controversies in the Bible, but Holy Spirit helped me to believe what is right and what is wrong.

Be not be low in your spirit, you still havent lost him, please dont allow satan to win.. just want to say that

 

[OldChurchGuy]

So I guess my question is, what do you do with stuff you don't have evidence for? How can you believe something as truth when it just as easily (perhaps even more so per Occam's Razor) could have been just made up a really long time again and incrementally added to and adjusted to suit the times at hand?

No, our discussion has been about religion. Just that I have been asking the questions that I've felt for years you weren't supposed to ask.

I've not read that Craig/Crossnan book though I've read a couple Craig essays. Doubt I'll get to it here soon. My reading right now is about 50% Bible and 50% non-apologetic Christian authors.

Enjoy your travels.

Incrementally my days are being more filled with joy. This has been a very difficult process to say the least. It has been the biggest struggle of my life.

I took the liberty of blending a couple of posts.

The first paragraph above which has the sentence "Just that I have been asking the questions that I've felt for years you weren't supposed to ask." really hit me. It got me to thinking of all the kids at Sunday School and Church camp events I have been with over the years and how I always encouraged them to ask questions and explore their beliefs. Recently, I began worrying that it had been a big mistake, that I was undermining their faith by allowing for "gray".

But, that sentence really spoke to me. After all, if you can't ask questions about God in a church setting, where can you ask them? And who says one is not supposed to ask questions? Anyway, thanks for what I am interpreting to be an affirmation that I may not have done much damage to the kids by allowing them to ask questions.

So, what do you do with stuff you don't have evidence for? I suppose it is up to the individual. Some may find it necessary to abandon belief in that stuff which lacks evidence. Others may be much more wary of it while never completely leaving that stuff behind. Still others accept (in varying degrees) that it is OK to have stuff with no evidence as holding on to that stuff has done no real harm to their life.

Personally, I am somewhere between wariness and it's OK. At this point in my life, my understanding of God is murky at best with participating in posts like this making the journey very worthwhile.

Granted, this relationship with God may be all in my mind and there is no way I know of to prove otherwise. I believe that God exists and I am satisfied with my personal experiences which reinforce that belief. Yes, this may very well be circular logic (I want to believe in God therefore I will interpret events as though God were involved) but I don't believe so.

I am reminded of a woman who was being interviewed in the book "Life After Life" (a series of interviews with various people who had near-death experiences) and she summed it very nicely by saying there was no way she could begin to describe what the experience was like. The reason is because she was limited to using three dimensional words to describe a fourth dimension.

I have thought of that often and, for me anyway, it goes a long way to explaining many of the things in the Bible that are confusing or bothersome. The writers were trying to decribe a fourth dimension with three dimensional words.

Enough preaching.

Glad to hear your days are filling with more joy. May this continue for all your days.

As always,

OldChurchGuy

 

[IndyEllis]

You have come a long way and studied a lot.

I have read and studied a lot. I think I'll try to reproduce a list of many of the books I've read over the last few years.

Belief comes from your heart,

"Heart." That's an interesting word.

Here's one definition...

the hollow muscular organ located behind the sternum and between the lungs; its rhythmic contractions move the blood through the body; "he stood still, his heart thumping wildly"

I doubt that's the one you mean. OK, how about this one...

the locus of feelings and intuitions; "in your heart you know it is true"; "her story would melt your bosom"

Now substituting out your original sentence...

Belief comes from your feelings and intuitions.

Doesn't really say much at this point and is getting close to being quite circular and self-proving. Almost...

Belief comes from your belief.

Doesn't really mean anything at that point.

The only real insight it seems to offer is the personal pronoun, "your." That your belief comes from your feelings and intuitions and somebody else's from his or her intuitions.

How exactly is that making any case for any sort of one true doctrine?

you dont need evidence,

I think you might possibly be flipping around your first and second person pronouns on this. Isn't what you're saying that you don't need evidence.

Which again, is seeming almost to point to your feelings and your intuitions. Almost to an if-it-feels-good-do-it-based faith.

There are other interpretations and books you read,

Indeed, and in fairness I have done my best to read many points of view.

you feel good for a while,

Are you sure you're not taking your point of view and putting it on another. But a sentence ago, weren't you in essence asserting that faith needed to come from one's feelings and intuitions and then now you are condeming it?

Which way is it?

It is evidence, and a lack thereof, that has challenged my beliefs. Not feelings.

but really did you ask Holy Spirit for the guidance before reading books?

Yep. Let's try an example...

Holy Spirit, how am I to interpret I John 5:7?

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. ~ I John 5:7 (KJV)

For there are three that testify. ~ I John 5:7 (NIV)

Wait a minute??? Where did the other half of the verse go in the NIV??? Isn't this the best verse in the whole Bible illustrating the principle of the Trinity???

Father, Word (wouldn't that be a John-ish way of writing it), Holy Ghost.

OK, a bit of quick research...

This is what's called the Johanine Comma.

This support for the doctrine of the trinity wasn't in original versions of the Bible. It was later added. Centuries later. And evidently got back-translated into Greek.

And recently, in this century, somebody decided to take that part of the verse back out of the Bible. On what authority did this little addition get put in? On what authority did this little addition get taken back out of many translations here recently in this century? Did the Holy Spirit just tell them to do it (perhaps as you're suggesting it should be done)?

There are thousands and thousands of differences between the various versions of the Bible of antiquity. Most are just normal human typos and spelling mistakes. However some have more significance than that though.

Did you know the story of Jesus and the women taken into adultery wasn't originally in the Bible?

Did you know the story of Jesus sweating like drops of blood wasn't originally in the Bible? Otherwise the gospel of Luke has Jesus as a calm-cool-and-collected JC. But since the theological war about whether Jesus was real flesh and blood was raging in the second century, this text got put in there. Most of the changes were just typos. Kinda like I do here all the time. But this one, for all the Bible scholars can tell, was [humanly and] theologically motivated.

If you're not familiar with it, welcome to the world of textual criticism. Real Bible study. And not the kind of Bible "study" over at somebody's house on a weekday night where chips and Coke are served with some appetizers to accompany chit-chat and Christianese. We're talking about really studying the Bible.

For my Faith I dont need evidence, cause I see evidence every day in my life

Paraphased...

For faith, you don't need evidence, because you have evidence.

Sorry, but frankly that's doublespeak.

Sounds not too different from a New Ager and his or her hooey saying, "I 'know' these crystal give me power because I feel it."

through the way God comes with his word so clearly.

Err, uh, I though we starting to get into textual critcism a bit. "Clearly?" Wait a minute. Did you just say God comes through His Word clearly?

I suppose one would hope that, but there isn't really anything definitively "His [one single] Word." If you go back to the manuscripts, there are lots of versions of lots of books which have been assembled into a few different canons. Marcion of Sinope was one of the first propose a list of books to be included in a "Bible." His list of books didn't include most of the NT books that are considered part of the by many Christians today. He also didn't include any of the OT books as he considered the oh-so-different God of the OT a separate God from that of the NT. Yep, he was a early "Christian" and thought the God of the OT and NT were separate Gods. (However, when your typical preacher is waning idealistically in an overly romanticized view of the characteristics of the "early church," often bashing "what's wrong with the church [in America] today," I think he just might be leaving this part out. Sigh. The messy real realities of the early church.)

However, this is how the early days of Christianity went. Rough and tumble.

And perhaps part of the reason this very site has one affirm the Nicene Creed is because that creed was one of the early attempts to get all this sorted out.

Men wrote books. Men copied books by hand. Men debated what they should believe. Men sufficiently agreed on a few tenets and wrote some "creeds" to support. Men debated what they should believe more and picked (and even edited here and there a bit) books selectively to support those common (as in "orthodox") beliefs.

And then today we can buy one of several beautifully bound versions (Protestant vs. Catholic vs. ...) leather bound with gold edges on the pages. (Or with Add-Ons such for Students or Women or Life Application or whatever.)

Once upon a time, I knew there were so many controversies in the Bible,

Now this point leaves me completely dumbfounded. How can you ever truly unknow something? I would think you still know it.

but Holy Spirit helped me to believe what is right and what is wrong.

Again, I'm dumbfounded. Century after century of church fathers and leaders. Trying to figure out Christology. Trying to figure out soteriology. Try to figure out what is TRUTH and what's not. Diligently praying, diligently analyzing multiple ancient manuscripts, diligently seeking the Holy Spirit, and you say, the "Holy Spirit helped me to believe what is right and what is wrong."

Stutiw, consider yourself blessed beyond measure. Perhaps you should write down what God has revealed directly to you (a bit like Joseph Smith or Muhammad or Paul for that matter) because for most all the rest of us, it is really, really hard.

Really hard.

(But then again, maybe, just maybe, that's, in part, why it's so easy for us to follow what somebody is claiming, though still unevidenced, as true.)

Be not be low in your spirit, you still havent lost him, please dont allow satan to win.. just want to say that

You, who just read this thread, now perhaps know a few new pieces of information about Biblical scholarship. You may have even clicked on a link or two and saw something new and intriguing that was never taught from your church's pulpit, never discussed in Sunday school, never addressed.

You now have to wrestle with it. Perhaps even to struggle with it as I have.

A page or so ago we talked a bit about what I called "intentional ignorance." Is that a solution? If so, it is preventive at best.

But once the cat's out of the bag, once one learns a bit more about the origins of the faith, the origins of the Word(s) of God, in true quest for truth, what happens?

A still, small voice (in and of the mind) tells one there is more. "There is more." "There is more," it whispers.

Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.

I searched. I learned. It did not affirm.

Faith in spite of evidence, I don't see how.

Delusion - (psychology) an erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:delusion&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

It is a struggle. Perhaps you understand. The fear that the beliefs held for half a lifetime were nothing but institutionalized hooey.

 

[IndyEllis]

Hope you had a good week. I had lots of business travels this week. I did manage to run 25.5 miles for the week despite the travels though.

I took the liberty of blending a couple of posts.

No worries.

The first paragraph above which has the sentence "Just that I have been asking the questions that I've felt for years you weren't supposed to ask." really hit me. It got me to thinking of all the kids at Sunday School and Church camp events I have been with over the years and how I always encouraged them to ask questions and explore their beliefs. Recently, I began worrying that it had been a big mistake, that I was undermining their faith by allowing for "gray".

Kids do ask the best questions about religion. A few weeks ago, I saw Amazing Grace with the family. The movie was billed as a movie, "every Christian must see." I kinda thought, gulp.

One of the kids asked what God says about slavery.

I told them what some verses in books of the OT say. The story of the Exodus. What ancient Hebrews and various other cultures practiced. What some verses in books of the NT say. How even some professing Christians over the centuries rationalized the enslavement of their fellow human (link is from an Islamic site taking pot shots at Christianity much in the way we take pot shots at Islam).

And I told them that I, myself, found it immoral and a horrible wrong to enslave another human being. Not so much as in telling them what and what not to do, bossing them around, but in owning them as property.

And I left it at that. However, I wonder when they'll come across Abraham Lincoln's religious beliefs.

But, that sentence really spoke to me.

That sounds so familiar to the all-too-casual "God/Holy Spirit spoke to me turn of phrase."

After all, if you can't ask questions about God in a church setting, where can you ask them? And who says one is not supposed to ask questions? Anyway, thanks for what I am interpreting to be an affirmation that I may not have done much damage to the kids by allowing them to ask questions.

Personally, I don't see how what I call "intentional ignorance" would help out anybody's faith. Especially not in the memetic free-for-all of the Internet in this century. These kids are going to be living in a world where everybody is getting exposed to everybody else's ideas in an unprecedented free trade of ideas.

Take a look at the Amazon religion and spirituality best sellers. It seems lots of people are seriously seeking. Seriously looking for answers and not taking the unexplained and unexplainable, magically "profound" and "mysteriously" devotional as anwers.

So, what do you do with stuff you don't have evidence for? I suppose it is up to the individual. Some may find it necessary to abandon belief in that stuff which lacks evidence. Others may be much more wary of it while never completely leaving that stuff behind. Still others accept (in varying degrees) that it is OK to have stuff with no evidence as holding on to that stuff has done no real harm to their life.

Personally, I am somewhere between wariness and it's OK. At this point in my life, my understanding of God is murky at best with participating in posts like this making the journey very worthwhile.

Personally, I think you may not be too different than me.

Granted, this relationship with God may be all in my mind and there is no way I know of to prove otherwise.

Indeed. Can't "prove" it as we discussed pages and pages ago. But there is evidence.

I believe that God exists and I am satisfied with my personal experiences which reinforce that belief.

I believe in this thread, this is the second time you have mentioned a belief that God exists. In my voyage of discovery, that hasn't been the primary question. Mine has been more, "is Christianity, and what version of Christianity, is the one true revelation of that for-the-moment-assumed-to-exist God?"

Given the slightly different points from which questions have originated, what do you think of the claims of various non-orthodox Christian cults and other religions?

Yes, this may very well be circular logic (I want to believe in God therefore I will interpret events as though God were involved) but I don't believe so. I am reminded of a woman who was being interviewed in the book "Life After Life" (a series of interviews with various people who had near-death experiences) and she summed it very nicely by saying there was no way she could begin to describe what the experience was like. The reason is because she was limited to using three dimensional words to describe a fourth dimension.

OCG, isn't the fourth dimension simply time?

Anyhow, last year I read a number of books on physics. Examples are Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe and The Fabric of the Cosmos. The universe could possibly have ten or eleven dimensions actually.

Anyhow, near-death must be an absolutely terrifying experience. Personally, I think one could grasp for any conceivable comfort in that moment.

I have thought of that often and, for me anyway, it goes a long way to explaining many of the things in the Bible that are confusing or bothersome. The writers were trying to decribe a fourth dimension with three dimensional words.

Or perhaps the creation myth, the flood myth (or maybe legend?), and the Babel myth are just ancient Mesoptamian goat-herder sci-fi.

Enough preaching.

Glad to hear your days are filling with more joy. May this continue for all your days.

Thanks. This week was generally a tough week though. Sometimes I miss not knowing what I now know. Because one just can't really unknow, I fear it just ain't gonna happen. Sigh.

I hope you've had a good weekend OCG.

 

[IndyEllis]

A curious bugger's reading list of the last four years or so (as much as I could recall searching Amazon, not including non-fiction and work-related books).

A Short History of Nearly Everything, Bill Bryson
The Fabric of the Cosmos, Brian Greene
The Elegant Universe, Brian Greene
A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking
The Universe in a Nutshell, Stephen Hawking
The Ancestor's Tale, Richard Dawkins
Before the Dawn, Nicolas Wade
The Selfish Gene, Richard Dawkins
Mapping Human History: Genes, Race, and our Common Origins, Steve Olson
The First Human, Ann Gibbons
Our Inner Ape, Frans De Waal
The Third Chimpanzee, Jared Diamond
Primates and Philosophers, Frans De Waal
The Unfolding of Language, Guy Deutscher
Empires of the Word, Nicholas Ostler
The Language Instinct, Steven Pinker
The Origin of Language, Merritt Ruhlen
The Power of Babel, John McWhorter
The Gifts of the Jews, Thomas Cahill
The Confessions of St. Augustine, St. Augustine
The Imitation of Christ, Thomas a Kempis
The Adventure of English, Melvyn Bragg
The Story of English, Robert McCrum
How the Irish Saved Civilization, Thomas Cahill
Gods Bestseller: William Tyndale, Thomas More, and the Writing of the English Bible, Brian Moynahan
The Pilgrim's Progress, John Bunyan
Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond
1421, Gavin Menzies
1491, Charles C. Mann
Over the Edge of the World, Laurence Bergreen
The Bounty: The True Story of the Mutiny on the Bounty, Caroline Alexander
Cook: The Extraordinary Voyages of Captain James Cook, Nicholas Thomas
1776, David McCullough
Washington's Crossing, David Fischer
Undaunted Courage, Stephen Ambrose
The Endurance: Shackleton's Legendary Antarctic Expedition, Caroline Alexander
Do You Speak American, Robert MacNeil
Paris 1911, Margaret Macmillan
My Utmost for His Highest, Oswald Chambers
Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis
Band of Brothers, Stephen Ambrose
D-Day, Stephen Ambrose
Citizen Soldiers, Stephen Ambrose
The Codebreakers, David Kahn
The Code Book, Simon Singh
Enigma: The Battle for the Code, Hugh Sebag-Montefiore
Codebreakers: The Inside Story of Bletchley Park, F.H. Hinsley
The Greatest Generation, Tom Brokaw
Failure is not an Option, Gene Kranz
Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Josh McDowell
Evidence for Christianity, Josh McDowell
The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel
The Case for Faith, Lee Strobel
Classical Apologetics, R.C. Sproul
Dutch, Edmund Morris
What's So Great about America, Dinesh D'Souza
What's the Matter with Kansas, Thomas Frank
Letters to a Young Conservative, Dinesh D'Souza
From Dawn to Decadence, Jacques Barzun
Misquoting Jesus, Bart D. Ehrman
Lost Christianities, Bart Ehrman
The Gospel According to Judas, Benjamin Iscariot
Religious Literacy, Stephen Prothero
Evolution vs. Creationism, Eugenie Scott
The Evolution Creation Struggle, Michael Ruse
Finding Darwin's God, Kenneth Miller
Darwin's Black Box, Michael Behe
The Language of God, Francis Collins
The Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington
The 9/11 Comission Report, National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Thomas Friedman
Longitudes and Attitudes, Thomas Friedman
The World is Flat, Thomas Friedman
Blink, Malcolm Gladwell
The Pentagon's New Map, Thomas P.M. Barnett
Globalization and Its Discontents, Joseph Stiglitz
One No, Many Yeses, Paul Kingsworth
Blowback, Chalmers Johnson
The Weather Makers, Tim Flannery
The End of Oil, Paul Roberts
An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore
Collapse, Jared Diamond
The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins
A Devil's Chaplain, Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins
Freakanomics, Steven Levitt
Chaos, James Gleick
The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell
Breaking the Spell, Daniel C. Dennett
Beyond Oil, Kenneth S. Deffeyes
Letter to a Christian Nation, Sam Harris
The End of Faith, Sam Harris
The End of Poverty, Jeffrey Sachs

 

[OldChurchGuy]

Hope you had a good week. I had lots of business travels this week. I did manage to run 25.5 miles for the week despite the travels though.



No worries.



Kids do ask the best questions about religion. A few weeks ago, I saw Amazing Grace with the family. The movie was billed as a movie, "every Christian must see." I kinda thought, gulp.

One of the kids asked what God says about slavery.

I told them what some verses in books of the OT say. The story of the Exodus. What ancient Hebrews and various other cultures practiced. What some verses in books of the NT say. How even some professing Christians over the centuries rationalized the enslavement of their fellow human (link is from an Islamic site taking pot shots at Christianity much in the way we take pot shots at Islam).

And I told them that I, myself, found it immoral and a horrible wrong to enslave another human being. Not so much as in telling them what and what not to do, bossing them around, but in owning them as property.

And I left it at that. However, I wonder when they'll come across Abraham Lincoln's religious beliefs.



That sounds so familiar to the all-too-casual "God/Holy Spirit spoke to me turn of phrase."



Personally, I don't see how what I call "intentional ignorance" would help out anybody's faith. Especially not in the memetic free-for-all of the Internet in this century. These kids are going to be living in a world where everybody is getting exposed to everybody else's ideas in an unprecedented free trade of ideas.

Take a look at the Amazon religion and spirituality best sellers. It seems lots of people are seriously seeking. Seriously looking for answers and not taking the unexplained and unexplainable, magically "profound" and "mysteriously" devotional as anwers.

Have you seen the website called www.religioustolerance.org? Like the Amazon reference, it covers practically every religion and group within a given religion. It is as close as I have found to being an objective "here it is take it or leave it" site as I have ever found.

Personally, I think you may not be too different than me.

I totally agree. Since I agree with just about everything you have written, you are definitely a brilliant person


Indeed. Can't "prove" it as we discussed pages and pages ago. But there is evidence.

Now here is a change! Up until now, I understood you to be the one looking for the evidence. What evidence have you found?



I believe in this thread, this is the second time you have mentioned a belief that God exists. In my voyage of discovery, that hasn't been the primary question. Mine has been more, "is Christianity, and what version of Christianity, is the one true revelation of that for-the-moment-assumed-to-exist God?"

At the risk of being permanently banned from this sight for blasphemy, it is my belief that Christianity is not the only revelation to discovering God. It is my understanding that many religions have parallel views on how to treat others, appropriate behavior, acceptance of ones self, etc. They often reflect their culture in how the wording is crafted, but the basic message tends to be the same.

The version of Christianity which is closest to the truth about God, is up in the air so far as I am concerned. I tend to take a much more cerebral look at the Bible with little emphasis on the emotion. Others are more emotional in their understanding / interpretation of the Bible with little emphasis on the cerebral. Perhaps, the ideal Christian is one who has balance of both cerebral and emotional understanding of the Bible. Are the literalists correct in their interpretation of the Bible? Perhaps, but there is much textual criticism (as you have pointed out so well) that questions the validity of a literal translation. Does that mean non-literalists are correct in their interpretation of the Bible? Perhaps, but who knows for sure?

Given the slightly different points from which questions have originated, what do you think of the claims of various non-orthodox Christian cults and other religions?

I may personally disagree with the views of various non-orthodox Christian cults and other religions but I do not see where that gives me the right to condem their beliefs. It seems to me that a final judgment is in God's hands, not mine.

OCG, isn't the fourth dimension simply time?

As science currently understands the fourth dimension, yes, it is time. But what better dimension to try and describe an eternal God than the dimension of time? Speaking of time and Einstein's theory, can God move faster than the speed of light?

Anyhow, last year I read a number of books on physics. Examples are Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe and The Fabric of the Cosmos. The universe could possibly have ten or eleven dimensions actually.

That is the current thinking. I haven't read the books, but am aware of the multi-dimensional universe theory. It didn't make sense to me until a story on NPR was discussing this theory with a physicist who explained to think of dimensions as attributes or characteristics. That makes sense to me.

Anyhow, near-death must be an absolutely terrifying experience. Personally, I think one could grasp for any conceivable comfort in that moment.



Or perhaps the creation myth, the flood myth (or maybe legend?), and the Babel myth are just ancient Mesoptamian goat-herder sci-fi.

Always possible. Although, keep in mind that science fiction at it's core is always a morality tale.

Thanks. This week was generally a tough week though. Sometimes I miss not knowing what I now know. Because one just can't really unknow, I fear it just ain't gonna happen. Sigh.

I hope you've had a good weekend OCG.

I want to apoligize for being selfish in this post. There has been much exchange of information and ideas which I have truly enjoyed. Looking back, though, I fear that many of my questions and responses were intended to "guide" you into my belief system. Fortunately, you avoided these attempts. I will work at being more objective and less "guiding" in my questions.

May peace and joy abound in your life every day.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

 

[Mobiosity]

I want to apoligize for being selfish in this post. There has been much exchange of information and ideas which I have truly enjoyed. Looking back, though, I fear that many of my questions and responses were intended to "guide" you into my belief system. Fortunately, you avoided these attempts. I will work at being more objective and less "guiding" in my questions.

May peace and joy abound in your life every day.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

Thank you for your posts OCG.

Mobi

 

[jak]

Yes, would like to add my thanks to, to both IndyEllis and OCG for the very honest discussion. I guess we are all struggling to a greater or lesser extent with our faith, and they have again under-lined for me the fact that we ought never to quit thinking and questioning. Sometimes I say or listen to the Nicene creed in church and say to myself, "Good Lord, what an amazing set of statements, do I really believe all these things?" It opens up the whole cosmos, and is so very alien to the dust-and-fight world we live in...and we say it off so pat, the words running into each other, almost...
I guess thats IndyEllis' question, too.
I suppose every thoughtful Christian has thought that way, sometime or the other. I know I have, but I was satisfied with an answer I found for myself. You, though, have done a lot more reading and are still looking for your answer, and I do hope you find peace and what you are looking for.
I believe Francis Scaffer did go through this very issue, too and I wonder if reading through some of his stuff would help you? I remmeber reading in one of his books that after many years as a missionary, perhaps after starting L'Abri, he had to go back right to the beginning of his faith and start from scratch.

 

[IndyEllis]

I want to apoligize for being selfish in this post. There has been much exchange of information and ideas which I have truly enjoyed. Looking back, though, I fear that many of my questions and responses were intended to "guide" you into my belief system. Fortunately, you avoided these attempts. I will work at being more objective and less "guiding" in my questions.

May peace and joy abound in your life every day.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

OCG, it is always a pleasure.

I have come across www.religioustolerance.org a number of times in searching but I can't say I have used it as a "resource" per say.

Actually I would think I just give the allusion of any sort of "brilliance" or type of intelligence at all for that matter. What I am though, is well read. Researched, analyzed, and synthesized. And perhaps the reason you might "agree with just about everything have written," is simply because most of what I have done is just stuck to the information that's generally out there. Rather than just kinda making stuff up and then boldly proclaim it as truth, or taking what one source has proclaiming it as truth, I've just kind of written what's already available. That's why the quotes, the links to encyclopaedic and other sources, etc. So it's not actually intelligence, not actually revelation from anyone, it's been mostly just plain hardwork.

Genius is 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration. ~ Thomas Edison

The other questions, I think I'll reply to in a PM.

 

[IndyEllis]

Thank you for your posts OCG.

Mobi

I would like to hope to think that my posts are welcome too.

I read Joshua, Judges, Romans, Titus, and James this week.

Your post reminded me a few verses from Romans...

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. ~ Romans 14:1

My "faith" is weak to the point of being non-existent.

Or then again, just flipping over one page, Paul writes...

I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. ~ Romans 16:17

 

[Mobiosity]

I would like to hope to think that my posts are welcome too.

I read Joshua, Judges, Romans, Titus, and James this week.

Your post reminded me a few verses from Romans...

Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. ~ Romans 14:1

My "faith" is weak to the point of being non-existent.

Or then again, just flipping over one page, Paul writes...

I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. ~ Romans 16:17

Of course your posts are welcome IE. OCG has been able to post the things I'd like to say, in the way I'd like to say them. I probably should have phrased it that way. As I read them, OCG has been supportive of you while providing food for thought.

 

[IndyEllis]

Yes, would like to add my thanks to, to both IndyEllis and OCG for the very honest discussion. I guess we are all struggling to a greater or lesser extent with our faith, and they have again under-lined for me the fact that we ought never to quit thinking and questioning. Sometimes I say or listen to the Nicene creed in church and say to myself, "Good Lord, what an amazing set of statements, do I really believe all these things?" It opens up the whole cosmos, and is so very alien to the dust-and-fight world we live in...and we say it off so pat, the words running into each other, almost...
I guess thats IndyEllis' question, too.
I suppose every thoughtful Christian has thought that way, sometime or the other. I know I have, but I was satisfied with an answer I found for myself. You, though, have done a lot more reading and are still looking for your answer, and I do hope you find peace and what you are looking for.
I believe Francis Scaffer did go through this very issue, too and I wonder if reading through some of his stuff would help you? I remmeber reading in one of his books that after many years as a missionary, perhaps after starting L'Abri, he had to go back right to the beginning of his faith and start from scratch.

I appreciate your participation. You are an interesting guy Jak and I hope you find the pursuit of truth interesting too.

I'm familiar with Francis Schaeffer indeed. Quite well in fact from a number of years ago.

Anyhow, the most intriguing point of your post was saying you were satisfied, in a past tense form.

Given all of this, how do you find yourself satisfied? I guess that's kinda at the core of my OP question.

 

[IndyEllis]

Of course your posts are welcome IE. OCG has been able to post the things I'd like to say, in the way I'd like to say them. I probably should have phrased it that way. As I read them, OCG has been supportive of you while providing food for thought.

Thanks for saying that. I wasn't sure.

Your "absense of evidence..." Carl Sagan signature line, made me remember that I've read a couple Carl Sagan books. I should have put them on my list.

And of a few additional Sagan quotes...

Where we have strong emotions, we're liable to fool ourselves.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense.

We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers.

When you make the finding yourself - even if you're the last person on Earth to see the light - you'll never forget it.

I remember the joy of watching Cosmos as a kid.

And I remember the enjoyment of reading Contact as a believer soon after it came out. Sagan definitely opens the door to personal experience.

Sagan was an extraordinary man.

 

[jak]

I appreciate your participate. You are an interesting guy Jak and I hope you find the pursuit of truth interesting too.

I'm familiar with Francis Schaeffer indeed. Quite well in fact from a number of years ago.

Anyhow, the most intriguing point of your post was saying you were satisfied, in a past tense form.

Given all of this, how do you find yourself satisfied? I guess that's kinda at the core of my OP question.

I guess I used the past tense referring to the time several years ago when my doubts were at their highest. I told you what satisfied me then. Intellectually, it was being convinced that the resurrection actually happened and if it did, belief was possible. Experientially, it was just a growing conviction of God's presence and concern for us. Not that i saw any lights or heard any voices though there was a time I really wished for those, lol, would make things so easy, no? But all around me, I saw and still see so many intangible things that cannot be explained otherwise. A parent changing attitudes after sixty years. A brother filled with peace and joy even when sick with MS (he has not been healed, BTW). A Brahmin friend sticking to the lord for twenty years despite the disapproval of her family, but caring for them lovingly throughout. A youth showing wisdom and restraint beyond his years. Friends opening up their lives and homes to those in need.

Maybe I'm seeing what i want to see. maybe, its always possible. An occasional doubt remains: i struggle, as you do. But on the whole, i see those things as God's nudging us onward towards goodness...a great miracle, really, and that stills my doubts and makes me bold to ask for more of those things.

 

[IndyEllis]

Jak, though I could point out fallacies in each of your points, why bother.

I think what may be more interesting is to indicate...

I too, don't understand all the goodness around me.
I too, don't understand the evil in the world.
I too, am inspired by those who may permanent lifestyle change, away from selfishness and self-destruction, to self-respect, reciprocity, and genuine altruistic care for others.
I too, am not beyond seeing what I want to see, either in my devout years or my present skeptical years.

However, I too, like your Brahmin friend, am at risk of being significantly marginalized and outcast by family and lifelong friends.

Just because I am bold enough to honestly admit to myself, that the evidence indicates, to me, that there is no means that I know that any or all flavours of Christian tenets, creeds, denominations, canons, or doctrines are the one true revealed truth at the exclusion of all others.

Only two people in my life really know of my apostasy. My pastor and friend of twenty years. And my wife of fifteen years. And my wife really, substantially, only as of yesterday. I have been dropping hints, having mini-conversations with her. But if in this there ever is any one conversation with her, it was yesterday.

And I cried.

 

[Crazy Liz]

(((((Indy)))))

 

[Mobiosity]

Thanks for saying that. I wasn't sure.

Your "absense of evidence..." Carl Sagan signature line, made me remember that I've read a couple Carl Sagan books. I should have put them on my list.

And of a few additional Sagan quotes...

Where we have strong emotions, we're liable to fool ourselves.

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense.

We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers.

When you make the finding yourself - even if you're the last person on Earth to see the light - you'll never forget it.

I remember the joy of watching Cosmos as a kid.

And I remember the enjoyment of reading Contact as a believer soon after it came out. Sagan definitely opens the door to personal experience.

Sagan was an extraordinary man.

Cosmos came out when I was newly married and we both enjoyed watching it. I sensed a sadness from Sagan during those broadcasts, I wonder if he knew he was sick then? Maybe it was the sadness of someone who no longer has room for magic in his life.