| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/19/2010 05:48:08 PM · #1376 |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 06:03:41 PM · #1377 |
Originally posted by shutterpuppy:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It seems to me that the further and further "out there" science reaches, the closer we are coming to the true, inscrutable face of God. |
I can see the attraction of this view. I would posit, however, that it is a face that resembles not one wit the small and petty deities that our human ancestors invented to give them comfort and ward off the terrors in the night. |
Oh, I totally agree. What men have made of God is laughable. But this doesn't mean I don't think there's a God, whatever s/he/it may be :-)
R. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 06:24:39 PM · #1378 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by shutterpuppy:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It seems to me that the further and further "out there" science reaches, the closer we are coming to the true, inscrutable face of God. |
I can see the attraction of this view. I would posit, however, that it is a face that resembles not one wit the small and petty deities that our human ancestors invented to give them comfort and ward off the terrors in the night. |
Oh, I totally agree. What men have made of God is laughable. But this doesn't mean I don't think there's a God, whatever s/he/it may be :-) |
Why is your notion better than other men's? |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 07:27:55 PM · #1379 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Why is your notion better than other men's? |
I didn't say it was.
R. |
|
|
|
02/19/2010 11:49:47 PM · #1380 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
Out of interest, at what point does a child become subject to hell and damnation for not converting? |
I have no idea. The Bible doesn't really give age limitations for that sort of thing. My belief is that God won't hold you responsible for decisions you're not capable of making, based on what The Bible says about God's character (gracious, merciful, loving, caring, patient, etc.).
Originally posted by Matthew:
If a child is brought up by a Hindu family and brainwashed with the correctness of that religion, what is the deadline for rejecting his or her teaching (after which, if they have failed to convert, they will face eternal damnation)? |
Again, I have no idea. I'm not God, so I really don't think it's my place to speculate who's going to heaven and who's not.
Originally posted by Matthew:
Should that child when old enough to understand comparative religion, but young enough to be totally dependent on his/her parents, reject the family belief system (and risk being thrown out of the house etc) or take the risk of delaying their conversion to Christianity and dying early (and risk facing eternal damnation)? |
If you're serious about becoming a Christian and you really love Jesus, you're not going to put off anything.
Originally posted by Matthew:
If I have been exposed to many environmental factors that predispose me to disbelieve Christianity, what is the difference between me not believing and a child or lost tribe not believing? I have never been given the proper chance in the same way as the child or lost tribe has not been given the proper chance. |
I think "the proper chance" differs from culture to culture. There are places in the world were Christianity is restricted from even crossing the border, and there are people that don't even have a Bible translated to their native language. Those situations are a lot different than someone growing up in the United States that probably at least hears Jesus' name and sees Bibles on the shelf at Borders bookstores.
Originally posted by Matthew:
Is any of this written down, or is all of this mere supposition over what you would like God to be (in relation to a God whose motives and ways are often said to be mysterious and unknowable)? |
There's a lot written down about conversion, heaven, hell, and judgment, but there are no specifics about age. All I know is that God is merciful and humans have some level of responsibility in choosing to follow Christ. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 12:34:26 AM · #1381 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Not sure I can connect all those dots as it relates to free will and predestination, but I'll consider it.
Here's my take, and I am not near the philosophy student of you, Johnny, Shannon, Louis, et al.
You can't have it both ways with Free Will and Predestination. It simply doesn't work.
Either God is all knowing (Predestination) or he isn't (Free Will). These are absolutes. You can't have a little free will or an all knowing God can't know almost everything. It's like being a little pregnant. Either you are or you aren't. There is no in between.
If God knows all, meaning he has a plan that is laid out and knows the what, when, where, who and how of all things. Then surely he knows who and who will not be saved. But God in the old testament and Jesus in the new testament have at times expressed anger, sometimes extreme anger. Anger is born out of frustration, and frustration is born out of misread expectations, meaning God expected one result but experienced another. Did God know or did he not know that Adam and Eve would take the forbidden fruit? Did God know or not know that man would become so evil that we have to destroy all but a few with the great flood? Did Jesus know or not know there would be merchants and money lenders at the temple?
If they knew these things (all knowing, predestination) then why were they so angry? Surely an expected outcome cannot bring about that level of frustration.
If they did not know these things (free will) then obviously God is not all knowing.
You simply cannot have both.
Now, as a father of a 9-year-old, I can tell you with a certain degree of accuracy what my son will decided given a choice. But, he does surprise me sometimes. If it the same way with God, and we are the 9-year-olds, then I would imagine that he can predict what will happen most of the time even if we have free will. But if he can't be 100% accurate, then Predestination is off the table. If he can, then Free Will is a goner.
Does this make sense? I look forward to yours and anyone elses take on this. |
These are all classic questions. They are good questions, and they are difficult questions. There are a lot of good answers for them too. Unfortunately, most of the time people have tons of difficult questions about Christianity but they don't get answers. Most non-Christians aren't likely to call up a local pastor or theologian to get answers to the hard questions, and you're average Joe Christian doesn't usually have a seminary education. Open Theism has offered some new and interesting answers to these questions. I took a class with Greg Boyd (leading Open Theism Theologian) in college. I don't agree completely with Open Theism, but I haven't studied it much. One thing that I appreciate about it is that it offers a new "outside the box" way of thinking about free will and predestination. In class, Greg Boyd explained that Open Theism suggests that God is all-knowing, but instead of knowing everything as absolutes, God knows everything as a realm of possible choices which if you think about it, actually makes God seem a lot smarter. We think of life as a series of chain reactions or related events (event A leads to event B, or choice X leads to choice Y). According to Open Theism, God sees our lives as a web of possible choices, and he knows all the possible choices that will result from those possible choices (Choice A leads to choice B or C or D or E or etc...). In other words, each human life contains infinite possibilities and God knows all of them. Think about a game of racket ball. Each time you hit the ball, the ball could pretty much bounce anywhere, but you do know ALL the possible places that it could bounce and all the possible paths it could follow, because you're in an enclosed room. You have some degree of influence over the path the ball will take, but you don't actually control its movements. In the same way, God knows all the places you can possibly go, but he lets you choose the path and the destination.
A lot of people think of Salvation as either God chooses or we choose. A lot of people also expect that all theological questions need to have clear human answers. I find it helpful to remember that while God has revealed many things about himself, we still don't know how everything works. I also find it helpful to think of Salvation as a something that is initiated and influenced by God that also requires a human response. Predestination is simply the idea that God has done everything to make Salvation possible for us so that we can't claim we somehow earned or achieved it for ourselves. God prepares the meal and sets the table, but we have to sit down and eat. But even then God still gently nudges us toward the dinner table. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 01:50:51 AM · #1382 |
There's a simple explanation for all of these conundrums... sneezes! Yep, it finally dawned on me that sneezes are the answer. When someone sneezes in the U.S., we say "Bless you!" It's practically automatic. We've heard that phrase repeatedly since childhood, and we just say it because that's what we've learned to do. I seriously doubt many of us believe that a sneeze actually means a disease or evil spirit is leaving your body or that your heart stopped. We don't actually stop to think about it. If challenged to explain why a sneeze requires our blessing, we'd either be stumped or rationalize some contorted explanation that probably wouldn't make much sense. The same thing happens with religion... people just accept what the've heard since childhood, and don't actually stop to think about it (or only go far enough to resolve the surface issues). By the time we're adults, we've accepted the premises as true and use rationalization to resolve any apparent discrepancies (what Johnny's been doing). Now, that's NOT to say the faithful are stupid. People of all classes and intelligence say "Bless you" to a sneeze even if they're perfectly capable of understanding that it doesn't make much sense. They do it because that's what you're supposed to do when someone sneezes.
Achoo and Johnny are probably steaming at this point, but bear with me guys. The thing that made me think of this is when the 'Questions About Xtianity" thread resurfaced and I saw Jason's last post about the Apostle's Creed where he proclaims that it's still relevant after nearly 2000 years, and that most Christians would have no problem with any of its statements. The thing is, neither statement is true— they're just assumed. The incorrect date of origin is a minor issue (about 1600 years, without some of the key lines), but the statements themselves are not all accepted even by the Bible! I'll just touch on a few:
Mark and Paul were apparently unaware of the virgin birth, and this is a key point that would have helped legitimize the "Son of God" claim they were trying to make. Granted, omission isn't necessarily proof that they hadn't heard of it, but for the same reason we can't really say they agree with the idea.
"Descended into Hell" doesn't appear in earlier versions of the Creed, and the Gospels don't agree on that either. Matthew says Jesus spent three days there after the crucifixion, while Luke has him telling a thief that they'll both be in paradise today. They can't both be right, and Mark doesn't mention it at all.
Entire wars have been fought over the legitimacy of the Catholic church, and even in these threads we've had people declare that Catholics aren't really Christians (the Pope says basically the same thing about non-Catholics).
I could go on with the Creed, but you get the idea. The point is that Jason apparently expects the Creed to be generally accepted and consistent, just as Johnny does with the Bible itself. There's no reason for them to really think about it until questioned on something specific. Then problems arise and we get stuck on whether babies are condemned, free will vs. omnipotence, whether deeds matter, the significance of Original Sin, etc. The assumptions can't stand up to scrutiny. Again, this is not an accusation of low intelligence (indeed, the rationalizations require some amazing mental gymnastics), but an observation that you guys are probably just reciting what you've been told and then trying to come up with explanations to fit the expectation that it's true. Example:
In a recent exchange here, Jason asserted that resurrection is physical. Does he actually believe this or is he just reciting what he's learned (like the sneeze example above)? He disputes a literal interpretation of Paul (or at least disagrees with a straight reading of it), and the later Gospels certainly seem to back up a physical resurrection (there's no body in Jesus' tomb). Alrighty then... the Christian contention is that the faithful/righteous will be resurrected and go to heaven just like Jesus (his own promise). Does anybody really think the graves of the most devout believers in any Christian cemetery are empty? After all, if the above contention is true, then there should be some empty tombs. Among the many bones found beneath St. Peter's Basilica are some claimed to be those of St. Peter himself. The Vatican apparently believes that some people will be resurrected just like Jesus, whose body physically left the tomb, yet expects the bodies of their most revered figures to be right where they were buried! IMO, this doesn't make sense (regardless of perspective) except as a tradition like sneezes— a social convention that we simply learn to accept. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 01:52:07 AM · #1383 |
| Wow, I posted something longer than Johnnyphoto! ;-P |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 01:57:39 AM · #1384 |
| FWIW most Jews respond to another's sneeze with "Gesundheit!" -- Yiddish or German for "health," which perhaps has a bit more relevance to the actual situation. I have no idea what Buddhists, Hindus, or Muslims say ... |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 02:07:15 AM · #1385 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Wow, I posted something longer than Johnnyphoto! ;-P |
...Even more amazing... I read the whole thing. :O)
Ray |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 08:50:19 AM · #1386 |
Okay, getting involved in this is probably a decidedly bad idea, but I thought it would be fun to lob the bomb of having a Quaker wading into the mix.
Someone said:
There's a lot written down about conversion, heaven, hell, and judgment, but there are no specifics about age. All I know is that God is merciful and humans have some level of responsibility in choosing to follow Christ.
Quakers and Calvanists don't believe that. Both groups believe that you're either called, or you're not. Quakers take it a step further, and actually believe that The Scriptures are a dangerous thing in the hands of someone who does not have The Spirit. And just to muddy things up even further, we believe that Jesus is The Word of God. The Bible is true. A subtle but significant difference. Many would say that the Protestant insistance on an inanimate object as The Living Word of God is at best wrong and at worst idolotry.
I believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ. I don't believe it's a negotiable point of Christianity. If you take away the stories of the Virgin Birth (something else I quite literally believe in), you only lose two chapters of Matthew and Luke. Take away a physical Resurrection and you lose the entire New Testament. I believe Jesus will physically return to earth one day, and that at that time the dead will be raised and the living will be transformed. Where the dead in Christ are right now or what they're doing, I haven't a clue. I don't think the Bible is very clear about what happens to us immediately following death. I don't think they're in Heaven because I just don't buy it that we're going to all go to heaven immediately following death, and at some point in the future go to Judgement Day. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? To quote N.T. Wright on the subject, "the ultimate destination is not going to heaven when you die but being bodily raised into the transformed glorious likeness of Jesus Christ." (N.T. Wright, Surprised By Hope)
|
|
|
|
02/20/2010 09:12:45 AM · #1387 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Wow, I posted something longer than Johnnyphoto! ;-P |
...Even more amazing... I read the whole thing. :O)
Ray |
I read the whole thing too....and it probably should be the last post in this thread.....hahahahha what a joke this thread will go in cycles for years to come.
But I found it ironic that a sneeze is the downfall in achoo's argument |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 10:19:39 AM · #1388 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I have no idea what Buddhists, Hindus, or Muslims say ... |
"Tibetan Buddhists believe a sneeze (like meditation, falling asleep, preparing to die) can provide a moment of "clear consciousness," when people are opened to greater understanding."
"Ah...ah...aaah...IGETIT!!" |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 10:21:48 AM · #1389 |
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
I believe Jesus will physically return to earth one day, and that at that time the dead will be raised and the living will be transformed. Where the dead in Christ are right now or what they're doing, I haven't a clue. I don't think they're in Heaven because I just don't buy it that we're going to all go to heaven immediately following death, and at some point in the future go to Judgement Day. |
2000 years and counting is a long time to stand in the waiting room. I hope there's some good magazines. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 10:39:27 AM · #1390 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
I believe Jesus will physically return to earth one day, and that at that time the dead will be raised and the living will be transformed. Where the dead in Christ are right now or what they're doing, I haven't a clue. I don't think they're in Heaven because I just don't buy it that we're going to all go to heaven immediately following death, and at some point in the future go to Judgement Day. |
2000 years and counting is a long time to stand in the waiting room. I hope there's some good magazines. |
Kind of like the DMV:-) |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 10:41:16 AM · #1391 |
| What about judgement day? All those corpses standing around waiting their turn must make things awfully musty... |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 11:49:09 AM · #1392 |
Hmmmm - I definitely like the 'sneeze/bless you' analogy. I've some variously religious co-workers, and this will be a good point to share.
Also found a quote that helps me calmly discuss religion with believers: "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan
Come to think of it, this might also be why agnostics/atheists often take a very long time to let go of religion. Trying to change (from non-logical, to logical thinking) is usually a foreign concept to many, especially if that is all they have ever known. Besides this very confusing restructure of thought, there is the inherent stigma & fear of non-acceptance. Not an easy thing to do, and I've been focusing on NOT being too pushy when discussing it with others who may still have faith.
Seriously, I do appreciate these threads & that so much discussion is brought about. Regardless of belief system, it has encouraged me to become a better, more caring / accepting individual who does not judge people (like I was raised to do...) |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 12:03:15 PM · #1393 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Louis:
Why is your notion better than other men's? |
I didn't say it was. |
It seems to me you did. You said that men's notion of god was laughable, and then you espoused belief in god. Why is your notion better? |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 05:12:18 PM · #1394 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Louis:
Why is your notion better than other men's? |
I didn't say it was. |
It seems to me you did. You said that men's notion of god was laughable, and then you espoused belief in god. Why is your notion better? |
I could be wrong but I got the impression he meant, the length of which men go with there beliefs is laughable. It's one thing to say I believe there's a god and quite another to describe god in great detail as most religions tend to do.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2010 05:25:52 PM · #1395 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Louis:
Why is your notion better than other men's? |
I didn't say it was. |
It seems to me you did. You said that men's notion of god was laughable, and then you espoused belief in god. Why is your notion better? |
I could be wrong but I got the impression he meant, the length of which men go with there beliefs is laughable. It's one thing to say I believe there's a god and quite another to describe god in great detail as most religions tend to do. |
Yanko has the right idea. It's one thing to believe in a higher power, so to speak, and another altogether to use that God to justify absolutely outrageous behavior, is pretty much what I was getting at.
R. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 06:31:29 PM · #1396 |
Originally posted by johnnyphoto:
If every Bible in the United States was burned today, it would be nearly impossible to rewrite. |
Excellent.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2010 07:28:33 PM · #1397 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
FWIW most Jews respond to another's sneeze with "Gesundheit!" -- Yiddish or German for "health," which perhaps has a bit more relevance to the actual situation. I have no idea what Buddhists, Hindus, or Muslims say ... |
"Please cover your face" |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 08:29:33 PM · #1398 |
| Two thousand years is a long time from our perspective, but from the perspective of eternity or even the entire history of the world - it is not a long time. It would be like maybe a week from our perspective. |
|
|
|
02/20/2010 10:17:22 PM · #1399 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It's one thing to believe in a higher power, so to speak, and another altogether to use that God to justify absolutely outrageous behavior, is pretty much what I was getting at.
R. |
The Aztec sacrifices come to mind......
|
|
|
|
02/21/2010 12:31:30 PM · #1400 |
Hello Everyone,
I am a senior in a Christian high school and I've gone to a Christian school for 10 years. Yes this is the first time I've posted anything on this thread and no, I haven't read all of it. But from the parts that I've read... this is my conclusion.
I am a Christian and so I believe the things (or at least the gist of the things) that people like  johnnyphoto and others have said. Again, I haven't read the whole thread. But on particular post caught my eye and it made me very sad.
 NikonJebsaid, "I think I'm done here. I have alternating feelings of horror and disgust the more I learn about Christianity here. I knew virtually nothing about it when I got to DPC three plus years ago. The more I learn about how God works according to Christians, the more saddened I am. How can a supposed caring, loving God be so rotten? You can scoff at my heathen, heretical concept of it all you want, but I'd rather have no life, no God, or the hope that maybe there is a kind and loving God, than have it the Christian way with the petty, vindictive, demanding, spoiled, wrathful God."
I believe there is a place for debate and that Christianity can hold as much water intellectually and logically as any other worldview... BUT our mission as Christians is not to debate-- it's to go and witness using our testimony. We are not going to bring people to Christ by ranting at them through a thread. We are only pushing them away from Christ. I don't think it's possible for someone to come to Christ and believe the Christian worldview by just reading the definition of our theology-- because honestly, our worldview is the definition of insanity. The Christian worldview--just read by definition is full of contradictions and paradoxes and mutually exclusive adjectives. For example, Christ was 100% God and 100% man. We have a 100% free will but God is control of 100% of everything. God is 100% loving and merciful but he is also 100% holy and just. It makes absolutely no sense!
But I'm not a Christian because my worldview makes logical sense. I guess some Christian theologians and apologists would disagree with me, but I don't have all the answers. Call me blind or stupid or whatever, but I'm content to leave the paradoxes in Christian theology as paradoxes. I don't believe as humans we can ever grasp the idea of God in entirety. The reason why I am a Christian is my EXPERIENCES. And as Christians when we witness... we are supposed to give our testimony--which is a story of our experiences and what God has done in our lives. Because our personal experiences cannot be debated--because they are OUR experiences. No one can deny that God absolutely changed my life and continually changes me every day and I would be dead or in jail today without him. That, while very short and lacking in details, is MY testimony. We won't win people over to Christianity intellectually or logically--we just won't because our worldview makes no sense. But God can touch people's hearts and souls and that's not our job. All we can do is live for God and share the story of what he has done in our lives.
So with that, I just hope and pray that any Christians reading this who want to try to win people over by posting their two cents about Christian theology on this thread will think twice and instead share their testimony. |
|
