Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I certainly do not worship anything or anyone. You cannot be correct about that. I am direct proof. Only if you count worship as something normal people do everyday, like watching TV or showing affection to their partner, could you ever count that as worship. But if you do count those things as worship, what kind of worship is your god receiving if it's comparable to that?
Let's look at what it means for the Bible to be authoritative. Should we accept every word as coming directly from God? Of course not. The OT histories are based on traditions from the vague past. Archaeology isn’t very kind to it, though there is reason to think that there’s some actual memory of those past times embedded in it.
But the Gospels are a lot closer to Jesus’ time, and seem to be based on documents that are even closer. Sure, the four writers interpreted it from different points of view, but we can certainly see Jesus there.
If we’re going to claim to be Jesus’ followers, we need some basis for knowing what that means. In the first century, you could talk to witnesses, or at least their disciples. But by our time, the Gospels are the only primary source for what Jesus actually said and did. That’s the basis for its authority. And I think it gives us enough to go on to form a pretty robust religion.
I’m not even so hostile to traditional Christianity. You can see quite clearly how Christianity was formulated to meet the needs of the time, and how the intellectual formulation was designed to let it be taken seriously by intellectuals at the time. But in many ways our metaphysics today is closer to the 1st Cent Jewish concepts than to 3rd and 4th Century Greek versions, and it’s not so clear that the reinterpretation to meet the needs of ancient culture is as useful to the modern portions of ours. (There are plenty of people for whom it still addresses issues that matter to them. But they’re not the ones that are leaving the faith.)
I think Jesus of the Synoptics, if combined with traditional spiritual practices and good worship, is perfectly viable in our culture. There are places that are making it work. But too often good scholarship is combined with insipid worship and a lack of emphasis on spiritual disciplines.
There are plenty of people with genuine faith who don't attend church because the churches have largely become spiritually vapid and full of false doctrine and moral hypocrisy, and are centered around man rather than Christ. That'll drive pious and Scripturally orthodox people away.I understand your thoughts on true faith as it contrasts with nominal or false profession; but I don't think that accounts for people who sincerely believed and yet left the church. As someone without belief in the Holy Spirit or the efficaciousness of election, I would look for non-spiritual explanations for why people left the church. For instance, no one leaving the church ever says, I left because I made an incense profession of faith. To hold your position, you would have to reject the actual answers people give for why they left.
Oh, sorry if I was unclear. I was responding to your sentence that said we are made to worship and everyone worships something. I was trying to say that I don't think that is true.I was replying to your question of why faith has declined not referencing you specifically at any point within my post. I truly have no idea what you are talking about in your response to me.
Oh, sorry if I was unclear. I was responding to your sentence that said we are made to worship and everyone worships something. I was trying to say that I don't think that is true.
There are plenty of people with genuine faith who don't attend church because the churches have largely become spiritually vapid and full of false doctrine and moral hypocrisy, and are centered around man rather than Christ. That'll drive pious and Scripturally orthodox people away.
There's a difference between losing faith in God and losing faith in church. Some people who have stopped attending church are getting their Christian fellowship and instruction in other ways.
Other people are merely religious but not truly born again and they stop attending because they lose interest and don't see the point, or because they find an alternative source of purpose and answers for things in various philosophies or sciences.
The culture in the U.S. has generally become less religious over the decades. Attitudes about various issues have changed, and for those who don't believe in the supreme and timeless wisdom, authority and relevance of the Bible, Christianity is backwards and old fashioned, unreasonable and mean. So churches aren't popular places to be, unless they're preaching to please their audiences.
Why do you think everyone worships something?I disagree but thanks for the clarification.
The problem is that the people who are open to rethinking Christianity are also the ones that are most likely to think that there's no convincing evidence for God in the first place.
Bringing Christianity to people who are still part of the traditional culture is easy. They don't want anything new; competent traditional theology is the best approach. Bringing Christianity to people who are part of the modern culture is a problem that we don't have a good answer to. But spiritual renaissance isn't a bad idea. We need to get members in liberal churches to practice spiritual disciplines. Without that we look too much like we're just pushing ideas can be implemented in a secular context just as well, even if we're being faithful to Jesus' teachings in what we do (which I think we are).
There are past and active attempts to reform the faith. Liberal theology from the 20th Century attempted this. Major Protestant denominations went through significant change. Methodists for example changed greatly since their Wesleyan founding. But it is difficult to rehabilitate the morality of the text when it clearly presents hell as punishment and women as spiritually insignificant. I am aware of the theological traditions and arguments that make a case for more palatable readings of Hell and women's roles in the church and society; I just don't see it in the perspicuity of the Old or New Testament. At this point, I think Humanism is able to make greater positive social change than religion.
If you were to reach your hand into a bag of atheists, chances are extremely high that you will pull out a western, white, educated, affluent male. In other words, someone who’s already on top of humanity’s heap. In general, they don’t “need” God. They’ll never go hungry, they’ll never have young siblings die, they’ll never get bitten by a snake while harvesting tea leaves. They’ll never know the hardships most of the world knows. It really shouldn’t be a surprise.
The Bible was written by different authors and passed from copyist to copyist. I liked Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7), some of the parables, Gospel of John etc. Some passages I set aside as beyond my ability to understand, whatever the reason. I liked the story about the Good Samaritan. It is an example of being a good neighbor. If the Bible states you should not give false testimony. That might be true. I do not need to accept the story of Noah or the seemingly incoherent parts of Revelation to gain access to Jesus teaching the Holy Spirit was going to be sent to his disciples. With this power God rescued lost sinners.I am always interested to speak with people who don't hold to inerrancy because they are more likely (in my experience) to give thoughtful responses and have an open conversation.
I do wonder however, how can a person trust that the Bible conveys accurate truth claims if it can error?
I will respond first by saying, I still haven't learned how to quote separate parts of a person's response. I even googled it. What am I doing wrong?I would argue that those who are still open to Christianity while thinking there is no evidence for God have deeper faith than those who have sufficient evidence for believing.
Christianity has always been about rejecting tradition and changing the status quo. We read about Jesus' ministry and how he radically challenged the traditions and theologies of the Pharisees. At the core of Christ's message lies the most humanist creed, in my opinion. The moment we stop being progressive is the moment Christianity will die (which is obviously starting to happen as seen in the OP).
Is it the lack of perspicuity in the Bible or is it the faulty hermenutics that have been so interwoven into the faith tradition of Christianity that we think it synonymous? When I left the orthodox Church I thought I had lost my faith, but in reality I was just working to separate the bad from the good. This is a transition that every person needs to make if they want to make it out alive on the other side.
People think it’s a religion when it’s a relationship with our creator.I think one reason is the “prosperity gospel” money grubbing TV preachers. That’s not Christianity, that’s evil greed and that’s what people associate Christians with. That and the cults that go door to door and try to convert you like the Mormons. That turns people off. People don’t understand Christianity. They think you have to give up things and be a perfect person.
You had me agreeing right up to the point of lost sinners. Do you mean that in the theological understanding of being apart from god and in need of salvation from hell?The Bible was written by different authors and passed from copyist to copyist. I liked Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7), some of the parables, Gospel of John etc. Some passages I set aside as beyond my ability to understand, whatever the reason. I liked the story about the Good Samaritan. It is an example of being a good neighbor. If the Bible states you should not give false testimony. That might be true. I do not need to accept the story of Noah or the seemingly incoherent parts of Revelation to gain access to Jesus teaching the Holy Spirit was going to be sent to his disciples. With this power God rescued lost sinners.
What creator? I don't think one exists. The natural world seems to be evolving on its own machinery.People think it’s a religion when it’s a relationship with our creator.
Is it still apostasy if you were never part of the church to begin with?It’s apostasy as prophesied in the bible.
I would say a lot of people are very uneducated about Christianity. A lot of people seem to think it’s all “pie in the sky” nonsense with no good reason to believe.But is that really true? I would prefer to ask people WHY the left the church. I don't think you can point to a 1st Century text to determine why people in the 21st Century are making decisions.
On its already existing machinery.What creator? I don't think one exists. The natural world seems to be evolving on its own machinery.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?