What would you do if Christianity turned out to be wrong?

[tadoflamb]

I tend to look at this question in the terms of 'if not Catholicism, then what? I came to the conclusion long ago that if I were to ever leave the Catholic Church, I would leave Christianity all together and revert back to my own self-styled version of born again, neo-paganism.

But now I'm not so sure, because if Catholicism is a myth, I can't think of a better myth with which to live my life. If anything, I'd probably ordain myself, consecrate an altar in my home and self-communicate every day.

 

[Victor E.]

I thought this would be a good hypothetical question to get some interesting discussion out of.

Just remember, it's a hypothetical. So, even if you believe the premise is impossible, you pretend it's possible and it's happened and then go from there if you want to play the game, so to speak.

Let's say tomorrow someone invented a time machine, went back to the time of Christ, and it turned out that Jesus was just a human being. Maybe he had some followers and some good ethical things to say, but it turned out in the hypothetical that our hypothetical time travelers filmed him saying he wasn't God, he was just a rabbi with some interesting ideas, a holy guy, but not the guy we think he was in terms of being God, being the Messiah, and so on and so forth. In the hypothetical, we can surmise that it was after his death that people started labeling him God and the Messiah and so on and so forth. He wouldn't have lied and said he was all those things- it's just stuff that people attributed to him later without his knowledge or consent.

So, the time traveler fills you in and shows you absolute proof- whatever you need to believe what they tell you, no matter what you ask for from them to prove it, they can come up with and you believe they're telling the truth.

What happens next? Do become an atheist? An agnostic? A Jew? Something else? Or do you just keep on being Christian because you like the moral principles and the rituals and the traditions associated with it, and the time travels did show that Jesus was a legitimately good fellow, and sort of believe it's worth doing even if Jesus is just sort of represents the way you think God is, or the way you think God should be?

If you pick something else, why do you pick it? If you stay Christian, do you want to keep Christianity the way it is, or do you immediately advocate for some changes in the Catholic Church (or whatever church you go to, if non-Catholics want to chime in) figuring that since you no longer think God forbids such and such or whatever, you are free to rethink some basic moral questions? If you keep it the same, how come? If you change it, what do you change about it and why?

For the sake of the hypothetical, we'll say the time machine breaks, and the blueprints were lost or something, so the time travelers aren't going to be able to check out the other major religions anytime soon. You could decide to be a member of any major or minor religion or whatever, but you won't know if they are true or false in a literal sense. It'd be just like today, except for the new findings about Jesus. We'll also say for the sake of the hypothetical that nothing the time travelers find when they go back to film Jesus gives any evidence or clues for or against any other religion's claims in general.

You're struggling with an unhealthy interest in speculation founded out of ignorance of the Truth. It's being covered up under the guise of the repetitive use of the word "hypothetical". This is not how you came to know Christ, and it is best that such an instability is quarantined. You know, bad company corrupts good character. My biggest qualm against this forum is the testing of the spirits.

"As I urged you on my departure to Macedonia, you should stay on at Ephesus to instruct certain men not to teach false doctrines or devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculation rather than the stewardship of God’s work, which is by faith." 1 Timothy 1:3-4

If we walk out the Truth then...we don't have to worry about such hypothetical untruths. Please, reconsider the appropriate location for such a post. This does not belong in this section (I wish things like this were not permitted at all for the sake of Truth, even in jest). It births division, distrust, instability, and unhealthy controversy. I do not mean to sound as if I am attacking you, I am opposing the suggestion of a lie.

 

[Vicomte13]

You're struggling with an unhealthy interest in speculation founded out of ignorance of the Truth. It's being covered up under the guise of the repetitive use of the word "hypothetical". This is not how you came to know Christ, and it is best that such an instability is quarantined. You know, bad company corrupts good character. My biggest qualm against this forum is the testing of the spirits.

"As I urged you on my departure to Macedonia, you should stay on at Ephesus to instruct certain men not to teach false doctrines or devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculation rather than the stewardship of God’s work, which is by faith." 1 Timothy 1:3-4

If we walk out the Truth then...we don't have to worry about such hypothetical untruths. Please, reconsider the appropriate location for such a post. This does not belong in this section (I wish things like this were not permitted at all for the sake of Truth, even in jest). It births division, distrust, instability, and unhealthy controversy. I do not mean to sound as if I am attacking you, I am opposing the suggestion of a lie.

It's posted here on The Lord's Table, because liberal Catholics are not afraid that addressing "iffy" questions is going to derail our faith. There's nothing to be afraid of, really.

 

[Victor E.]

It's posted here on The Lord's Table, because liberal Catholics are not afraid that addressing "iffy" questions is going to derail our faith. There's nothing to be afraid of, really.

That's not an "iffy question" it's simply not true. It's simply being exposed for what it is. This response is received with hostility because it doesn't want to accept that it is wrong. True love doesn't sugarcoat and uphold the lie but salts everything in the truth and rejoices. It does not delight in wickedness. The fact that this post is regarded as an "iffy question" is a fear in and of itself. A fear for what others will think. We are not called to speak in order to please everyone but to speak the Truth of Christ Jesus, by which we are saved.

It is this wavering instability that clouds the correct mindset. "Miracles and healing can't happen anymore, only in the past, you gotta earn it" everyone is capable but many want to compromise. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Bad company corrupts good character. Trying to please everyone for the sake of peace has its place, but never at the cost of Truth in the knowledge of Christ. That is conforming to worldly patterns and not renewing the mind. "liberal Catholicism" has an appearance of wisdom, but everyone wants to compromise the Truth under the false pretense of love and kindness. If no one speaks of it, then everyone will continue to live in fear, rather than the confidence and boldness to speak on what is correct, and incorrect. It was said there is nothing to be afraid of? Yes, nothing to be afraid of. Patterns don't want to change. They want to continue being...patterns. The same thing over and over and over.

“To whom would He teach knowledge,
And to whom would He interpret the message?
Those just weaned from milk?
Those just taken from the breast?

“For He says,
‘Order on order, order on order,
Line on line, line on line,
A little here, a little there.’”

Indeed, He will speak to this people
Through stammering lips and a foreign tongue,

He who said to them, “Here is rest, give rest to the weary,”
And, “Here is repose,” but they would not listen.

So the word of the LORD to them will be,
“Order on order, order on order,
Line on line, line on line,
A little here, a little there,”
That they may go and stumble backward, be broken, snared and taken captive."

Isaiah 28:9-13

You are mistaken if you think I was afraid. If I was afraid, I would not have spoken in this way. I am concerned for others, not for myself. If this sounds self-righteous that is simply a spirit that doesn't want to submit to the spiritual authority of the Truth. Everyone who has the Spirit through faith in the message of the cross, has received the gifts, but they are afraid to walk them out, because they are afraid of what people will think about them. This is the Truth.

Test the spirits. Confessing Christ in truth is confessing everything He taught, and DID still applies today. It is saddening that many deceitful spirits have wormed their way into the Church and I know, because I used to have many of them, and the "teachers" I had...didn't know understand what it is they were teaching. We can teach with good intentions but it must be tested by the Truth of Gods Word and from the knowledge that is received in Spirit. It said "not many should be teachers" but there are an overabundance of teachers and not all of them are teaching sound doctrine but from a worldly understanding of the Holy Scriptures.

"God told me" "the Lord's Table" "God showed me" "Are you saying! *gasp* (accusation)" is often another way of spiritually saying "I don't want, need, or require any further instruction in my life from you". Not always, but often.

"Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith in God, instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this we will do, if God permits." Hebrews 6:1-3

"Those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh; but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. The mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind of the flesh is hostile to God: It does not submit to God’s Law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:5-8

Love and Truth walk together in unity. I'm simply playing the "bad guy" because no one else seems comfortable with it. There were already many amicable responses to the idea.

 

[Vicomte13]

The fact that this post is regarded as an "iffy question" is a fear in and of itself. A fear for what others will think.

Actually it's not. What I wrote was a gently worded rebuke. ... And I'll leave it at that.

 

[Fish and Bread]

Actually it's not. What I wrote was a gently worded rebuke. You took it as an opportunity to write another long post presuming to lecture us, so I will speak more directly this time. We are Catholics: spiritually mature people. We have the apostolic succession, the sacraments, the saints, the Scriptures, the Holy Spirit, the promise of God and we know we have a guardian angel beside us to keep us safe - and all of the confidence that comes with knowing that. We know we have nothing to fear, and so we DON'T fear. What's more, this is the Liberal Catholic Forum, so we are the sort of Catholic who tests limits, asks questions - the St Paul and St Thomas types, who boldly go where no man has gone before, precisely because we are completely secure in our faith.

You've come into our house, and you're uncomfortable with the openness of our speech and our willingness to engage in speculative questions, for our own amusement. You've chosen to preach at us. It's immature and silly and out of place here.

Now, because we're grown-ups, there's no hall monitor who will come and drag you away, but basically when you're speaking with a bunch of Catholics, writing as though you know it all when you don't even have the rudiments of the True Religion behind you, it is just out of place and silly.

You wrote out of concern for us. Now I'm writing out of concern for you: you're making a fool of yourself here with that sort of thing. Nobody is going to read it, or pay attention to your preaching. You're not a priest, you don't have the training or the authority to preach. Your spirit is in some peril because you have only an imperfect understanding of Christianity. You would do well to stop pretending to be a preacher and instead go to the cathechism for adults at your local parish.

There. That was much more direct, and a bit rude - a less gently-worded rebuke. You're free, as always, to do as you please with it.

Quoted For Truth.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

Just a friendly reminder for anyone who is not a member of this faith group.

House Rules
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the beliefs of this group will be considered off topic.

Visitors are welcome to share and participate in discussions with us. However, visitors must do so respectfully. This forum does not exist as a place for visitors to come and debate contentiously over why they disagree with us. If you are are a visitor and you would like to learn more about our viewpoints or beliefs, or perhaps you just want to understand how we feel about a specific issue, then you are welcome. But this is not a place to teach us the errors of our ways.

TLT Statement of Purpose

 

[tadoflamb]

I think I'm the minority report here. I was pretty happy as a secular pantheist. I didn't need God, and I don't like the strictures of religion. Some of the things that Jesus says, particularly about lust are pretty restricting. Also, I generally find Christians (present company excepted, of course, which is why I post the most here on this particular forum) to be among the most self-righteous, priggish, unpleasant people around.

So if Jesus were disproven, I would rather happily drop the corset of moral restrictions that he places upon me. It is not natural to me to be COMPLETELY honest, COMPLETELY monogamous, particularly forgiving or at all charitable. It is in my nature to look out for me, to enjoy sexual relations with different, interesting partners, to get even with people who do me wrong, and to invest my money at interest so that I can enjoy a more pleasant life for myself and for my descendants.

Christianity is a corset for me, and a binding one. It pinches, it rubs, it restricts. I don't like it. I don't like it and I would not be a Christian, let alone a Catholic, if I had not scientifically proven to my own eyes that they are literally true.

This is one of the reasons that I roll my eyes with derision at people who say "you just gotta have FAITH - religion cannot be proven." That's false and I know it. ONE religion can be proven - Catholic Christianity. That's the ONLY REASON that I stick to its quite straightened and quite narrow path, not because I like it - I DON'T - not because there is nothing better - secular humanism and indulging my passions is MUCH more pleasant - not because I like the "fellowship" - present company excepted, expressive Christians are annoying prigs. I'm a Catholic BECAUSE it's True, scientifically proven, by me, to me. That's why. That's the ONLY reason why.

Jesus' yoke is easy and his burden is light for many, apparently. Not for me. Catholicism is really restrictive for me. I don't like it. The path is narrow and constricted, and there are thorns in the bushes on all sides! Ouch! I follow Jesus because he's real, and there is a Heaven - I've SEEN a gate of it, from below and afar - and there IS a black abyss utterly cut off from God - I've been there. I've been there and I do not want to go back.

So, I'm motivated as much by the fear of God as the love of God, and I really have to work at the whole forgiveness and charity thing. They are not natural to me, and I wouldn't bother with them if I didn't know it was true.

Disprove Jesus, and you set me free of a lot of rules I'd rather be free of. Obviously I would not then leave this religion, with its human god, and go running off into any other religion, all of which are just gross stupidity and ancient superstition. The Roman pantheon of gods is more appealing than the riotous Hindu nonsense or the pious vapidity of Bhuddism. Take Christ out of the picture and I'd just as soon release weaponized anthrax in the Muslim world and kill them all, because they are utter barbarians driven along by a demon god, as far as I can tell.

So, the reality of Jesus is pretty central, really. Knock him out of the picture, and you will have knocked all of the external physical scientifically-examinable proof of the existence of God out of the world, and then you are left with Zeus, Athena, Allah, Krishna, Buddha and all of the other cranky superstitious nonsense of the ages.

This is a really interesting post. I had an intense conversion experience as well though not as intense as yours. Each to their own measure, I suppose.

I like what you said about the Church being restrictive, not that I share the sentiment. Really, I've found Catholicism to be more liberating than anything. I do feel like St. Peter where Jesus tells him that someone else will dress him and tell him where to go. I guess that applies mostly to my being an altar server, it really does keep me tethered to the Church.

 

[Vicomte13]

I like what you said about the Church being restrictive, not that I share the sentiment. Really, I've found Catholicism to be more liberating than anything.

Not me. Masturbation is a mortal sin. Fornication is a mortal sin. Adultery is a mortal sin. Even THINKING about sex with a pretty woman passing by is adultery, and a mortal sin.

The corset of sexual rules are really strict, and amount to a perpetual state of being in sin, or nearly in sin, the need to repent, etc. If Jesus isn't real, then getting rid of those crazy rules is reason enough to completely junk the religion.

The only reason to put up with such rules and try to be good is because, actually, those things really are sins, and they really matter, because God is real, and Jesus is divine, and he said so.

The perfect analogy to what I speak here is found in a song sung by Rex Harrison in the original Doctor Doolittle movie in the 1960s.

It went like this:

The day that I became a veterinarian I had a sudden overwhelming wish
To be a pure and simple vegetarian - and give up eating all that meat and fish.
So now I live on healthy food instead...
Like apple cores, and parsnip juice, and chunks of plain brown bread.

When I see my fellow men consuming sirloin steak,
And I find myself enjoying tea and Dundee cake
There is really only one conclusion I can make:
I'm a devoted vegetarian.

When my host at dinner offers succulent roast beef
Proudly I refuse it! People stare in disbelief
Lost in admiration as I nibble on a leaf.
A very noted vegetarian.
(I wouldn't even eat horseradish in case I upset the horses!)

I stay away from devilled ham on principle!
I wouldn't eat roast duckling if I could!
Will power has made me invincible!
My word, those sausages look good...

You have no idea what I put up with on their account!

I eat every flowering shrub there is, except for gorse.
Sometimes I get luxuries like beetroot leaves, of course.
My life's much the same as that of any English horse!
Why should I be a vegetarian!

Turnip pie and peanuts - that's the sort of filth I eat!
Any sort of rubbish that is wholesome and discreet.
Why don't I admit that my hypocrisy's complete?
If I should live to be a centenarian...
Become our most adored humanitarian...
I'll never make a decent vegetarian...
I'm a cheat!
I love meat!
I'm a cheat! YES I AM!
I love red, bloody, juicy chunks of meat!
Legs of lamb!
Sides of beef 'n chops 'n steaks 'n veal
And pork, of course, my favourite meal!

But then I head poor Gub-gub squeal..
Oh me...
Oh my...
A reluctant but sincere vegetarian, am I.

And that is not very far from my sentiments about Catholicism. Really not very far at all.