1. no, the bible was written by men, and then decided in a council of men about which books would be included. That is historical fact. No Christian should deny that. 2. I follow the bible as exactly as I possibly can. I'm far from perfect, and learn more about the bible all the time, so that long ago what I thought was following the bible was really only following it with a limited understanding. As my knowledge about the bible grows, so does the way I follow it. 3. I didn't say that I had problems with parts of the bible. I said that parts of it weren't meant to be literal and were just a story to illustrate a larger point. I think also parts of it make sense when in taken in the context of the people it was written for and to. Parts of it that were huge to the culture it was written in at that time, seem almost trivial to us now. That being said there is still plenty that I don't know about the intricacies of the language it was written in, and the context of the culture to be any kind of an expert. I just keep studying, learning, and doing the best I can. 4. I don't know that my brand is any more correct than any other. I'm not going to judge that. I can point to the bible about why I believe the way I believe. 5. I don't necessarily discount the claims of other religions. The reason why I follow Christianity is because it preaches the idea of loving your enemy, and giving freely what someone else would steal from you, doing good to people who would do bad to you. To my way of understanding divinity that is beyond human nature and into the divine. Other religions will say to defend yourself or go to an eye for an eye. That is human nature to me. To do something beyond that is what I feel Christianity teaches and strives for more than any other religion. 6. Yes, it is historical fact that there are parts of Zoroastrianism that were before Christianity that certainly were borrowed by Christianity, and and we know that holidays and other events in Christianity were adopting various pagan holidays. Again that's all part of historical record and shouldn't really be disputed. 7. I don't really know about the virgin birth, but I have my doubts about it being true. In the end it doesn't really matter, because it doesn't change the message of Jesus. I'm just not sure about it. It might be or it might not be. 8. I certainly don't believe the story of the ark and the flood is 100% literal. I do believe in the message of the story. In the bible Jesus himself spoke about the spirit of the law not being forgotten while following the letter of the law. People's understanding of nature, physics, and science has changed since the biblical times, I think to believe in the same science and physics of that time period is to deny are ability to increase our understanding keep ourselves ignorant instead of growing.
Thanks for the responses, but they do lead me to a few follow up questions. In your quest to follow the Bible as closely as possible, how do you integrate the old testament (if at all)? What criteria do you use to identify what parts of the Bible are literal and what parts are not? I'm hoping for something other than "I just know". Does the fact that Christianity borrowed so much of its story from past religions not raise questions about its validity? There is overwhelming, peer-reviewed empirical evidence (video here - pertinent info start at 3:10) which indicates that contemporary atheist countries have higher aggregate "world values" than religious countries. If it's human nature to be generally defensive and adopt less accepting ideals such as "an eye for an eye", then why do the non-religious tend to be less violent?
According to most faiths, we live on Earth - not Heaven. There is supposed to be suffering, etc. So no - the fact that things aren't perfect is not evidence that God is a failure. I think atheists should respect people's wishes to worship - especially in this country. Religion is hardly an oppressive force here as it is in some of the theocracies around the world.
Ironic suggestion, considering that one of the reasons religion has become an oppressive force in other areas of the world is because they do their best to silence dissenting opinions.
There's a lot from the old testament that's important. As a follower of Christ I look at some of what he said about the old testament. When asked about the 10 commandments Jesus said the most important ones were to Love God, and then Love thy neighbor. Both of the things Jesus talked about were love. I also look at the old testament through other parts of the new testament. Two verses in particular, Those that know love know God, and Gos is Love. Again, in the Old testament I look at the overall message. There were bible heroes that did awful rotten things, and yet they were the heroes of the story. It's an amazing testament to God's love and forgiveness. Not only were those people who did rotten things loved by God, they were actually chosen to be his heroes or protagonists of many of the stories. Some were cowards, some were drunkards, some were murderers, and violent men, yet despite their faults they were loved, and accepted by God enough to be their heroes. It's pretty amazing that rather than writing about pristine, do-gooder, Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves kinds of heroes, many of the old testament stories have heroes with horrible flaws and character traits. That's a lot of love shown by God. I think the problem is when anyone looks at the bible or religion as a set of rules. That isn't what it should be. As far as what's literal and what's not, it depends on the particular story. I try and use bible study to figure out as much as I can. For instance I had read the first part of Genesis about the earth being created many times before I learned that it is a poem. It's structured in a way that is particular type of ancient poetry. So for those that think creation is literal, I disagree. There aren't many poems that are literal. There are other stories in the bible that are poems as well. I can't remember which one, but one of them starts a stanza or line with each letter of the alphabet and proceeds in that fashion until the poem is over. When I'm not sure, I ask if God is love, what is the most loving way to look at a particular bible story, what other stories were around at the time that the people who were hearing or reading the old testament story would relate to, and is that why it was told in such a way. Also if there are 6 other religions around at the same time with a similar story such as a great flood, then I don't think it's necessarily going to be one that's literal. But is one that puts a biblical view on a story people are familiar with and may be better able to get the message out. The more I can learn about other religions, and ancient cultures and traditions the more it helps me get ideas on which parts of the old testament are literal or not. As far as atheist nations having higher world views and than more religious nations, I'm not sure. I think mankind has made a lot of messes of religion, and it gets abused and used to justify horrible things. It can become a tool in the hands of people who have less regard for others lives. It's sad and wrong when that side of people's nature wins out. I think in countries that are more atheists people in power don't have religion to use as a tool to push people towards violence. Most folks including myself fall short of the ideals of religion. That's too bad. It doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it. And different people have different ideas about religion. Just look at all the Christians that use the religion to doubt science, bash homosexuals, judge others, horrible stuff, that definitely damages many people's idea of what Christianity or God is. I hate that. But I see it all the time. For a lot of people religion is a crutch to help put meaning onto things they don't understand, make sense of parts of the world that seem senseless and try to give it some bigger meaning. Some folks want it to be about some all-knowing being type deity that gives them a set of rules to follow. When looking at religion that way it's easy to people who don't follow those rules and judge them as bad because of it. But I think that's kind of a shallow uncomplicated way of looking at things.
It is very interesting especially considering one of the Judeo-Christian traditions of the time. Students who studied with rabbis were expected to read the stories of the old testament study them, and actually come up with arguments and doubts about them. The better they were able to argue against them the more they were praised by their teacher. This was part of what people did back then, was to debate and argue and try to disprove biblical stories. That was especially true of people who were studying to join the clergy. There are a lot of people who say you have to accept everything in the bible, and never question it at all. Of course that isn't the way things were done at the time of the bible by the folks in the bible who are the examples we are supposed to follow. It's a case where bible study can lead to greater understanding than just reading the bible.
This is my major problem with Christianity (well, religion as a whole, but my day-to-day experience is more with Christianity): if the teachings of Christ were really so central to your life, and so important to you, down to your very soul, you would spend more time studying them. Examining them. Questioning them. Researching them. Rhester and rocketsjudoka obviously have, and I thank them for being so forthcoming and answering some pretty tough questions. But I believe the majority of Christians do not. They take what is handed to them in nice, neat littler sermons, 30 minutes at a time every Sunday, and base their entire life on it. It's mind boggling to me. My mom (RIP) was a devout Christian most of her life. She read more bibles than I can even mention (when she passed away, we found every translation conceivable on her bookshelves, all obviously well-used and bookmarked). She read concordances, opinions, histories, you name it. And by the end of her life, you know what conclusion she came to? She didn't like Christians very much. She and I talked religion a lot (maybe more than anyone in my family realizes) because she worked in the church and I do, too (bet you thought I was an atheist, huh? :grin: ). She came the conclusion that Christians tend to believe what they want to believe. They want to believe the bible is the undisputed word of God, but there are parts that don't quite line up with their modern sensibilities, so the want to believe those parts are allegorical. They've never even heard of the Councils of Trent or Nicea, and probably couldn't even spell "ecumenical", let alone define it within the context of the church. So, yes, Christianity bothers me (even though I do have my own religious beliefs). It bothers me that good, reasonable people like rhester and rocketsjudoka are roped in with folks like this: But what bothers me as well is that I don't hear many of those good, reasonable Christians voices in opposition when something like this shows up in the paper: See, it's easy to recognize the insidiousness of the Westboro Baptist Church. Their views are so extreme, it's difficult to understand where they are even coming from. But something like Gary Varvel's cartoon is far worse, IMHO. This cartoon was published in the Indianapolis Star, a mainstream newspaper, and basically equates atheism to tyranny and injustice. It seems to be the Christian way in this country: claim to show love to everyone, but shout down and demonize any voices of dissent. How many times have you heard people spout off the phrase "This is a Christian nation"? I hear it ALL the time, and it always irks me, usually followed by the phrase "if you don't like it, leave!" I think maybe my Mom was right. EDIT - Just saw this: He's not an extremist. He's not some nutjob on the street with a sign. He's the Governor of the state of Texas and running for the highest office in the land and he's talking about banning abortion and suppressing the gay community based on what God wants. THIS is the problem with Christianity. It doesn't want to be a religion: it wants to be THE religion.
Thanks for sharing that. I agree there are plenty of Christians like that, and they are the squeaky wheel that gets all of the grease. As a Christian I hate that that type of Christianity is what ends up becoming the face of it. I think one reason others who feel differently don't come out and talk about it all that much is that they don't feel any connection to it. The God hates **** group doesn't represent what they believe. And when atheists come out and attack Christians for believing in a God that would allow such suffering in the world, that isn't what they believe either and it isn't being attacked. So why would they get involved in the conversation? It happens all the time on Clutch religion threads. Two sides are arguing about stuff, that I just don't believe in. I hate the idea that people put religion into groups of whose in and whose out, and the people that believe one way are in, and anyone who believes differently is out. I don't know if you've read any Rob Bell, but he's an amazing writer who talks about the bible and bible study, and has amazing knowledge that he makes so simple. But he doesn't dumb it down. Velvet Elvis, and Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. It's amazing stuff, and fundamentalist pastors hate it. It's worth a look from people who aren't Christian or religious in any way.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond in such a civil manner to questions that are clearly intended to challenge your beliefs. Many others aren't so willing. That said, I still find a lot of your answers to be vague and indirect, but as long as they're truthful I suppose that's all I can ask for.
Thanks for including me with such high company as Rhester. I hear where you are coming from and it sounds like your mom had the same experience as Landlord Landry regarding Christianity. I can understand the negativity towards religion and frankly I am not sure if it is a net good or net bad given how many horrible things were and are still being done its name. I can also understand why atheist feel oppressed and I think that drives the harshness of those attitudes towards the the religious, luckily we Buddhists seem to be cool in the eyes of most atheists . To me though what matters is whether you believe in a deity, metaphysical philosophy or not in those things is what kind of person does that make you? I have personally seen first hand how Christianity has made people better people (I have also unfortunately seen how it makes some worse) so if it helps people but can't be proven empirically what does that matter?
I'm sorry if my answers were vague and indirect. I think it's difficult in the message board environment to really go into any real depth, and even then, I wouldn't write about it as well as I wish I could. The author Rob Bell that I mentioned earlier comes closest to someone who has similar beliefs regarding Christianity as I have, and his work has helped shape my beliefs, and open my eyes to different things. I know books about religion may sound boring but they really are good books, and easy to read. Here are just some of the things the book talks about. Mainly debunking the idea that only people who say the sinners prayer about asking Jesus in their heart will be saved. Some of this is from the book, and some just summary. It doesn't really do the book justice but it does go slightly more in depth on just part of what you asked me. It starts out talking about an art exhibit at his church in Michigan where they had an art exhibit. One Woman included in her work a quote from Mahatma Gandhi, which a number of people found quite compelling. But not everyone. Someone attached a piece of paper to it. On the piece of paper was written: "Reality check: He's in Hell." Really? Gandhi's in hell? He is? We have confirmation of this? Somebody knows this? Without a doubt? And that somebody decided to take on the responsibility of letting the rest of us know? Of all the billions of people who have ever lived, will only a select number "make it to a better place" and every single other person suffer in torment and punishment forever? Is this acceptable to God? Has God created millions of people over tens of thousands of years who are going to spend eternity in anguish? Can God do this, or even allow this, and still claim to be a loving God? Does God punish people for thousands of years with infinite, eternal torment for things they did in their few finite years of life? This doesn't just raise disturbing questions about God; it raises questions about the beliefs themselves. Why them? Why you? Why me? Why not him or her or them? If there are only a select few who go to heaven, which is more terrifying to fathom: the billions who burn forever or the few who escape this fate? how does a person end up being of the few? Chance? Luck? Random Selection? Being born in the right place, family, or country? Having a youth pastor who "relates better to the kids"? God choosing you instead of others? What kind of faith is that? Or, more important: What kind of God is that? And whenever people claim that one group is saved, accepted by God, forgiven, enlightened, redeemed-and everybody else isn't--why is it that those who make this claim are almost always part of the group that's "in"? Have you ever heard people make claims about a select few being the chosen and then claim that they're not part of that group? -----edit------ The book goes on to talk about how people "get saved" -----back in the book----- Some believe that he would have had to say a specific prayer. Christians don't agree on exactly what this prayer is, but for many the essential idea is that the only way to get into heaven is to pray at some point in your life, asking God to forgive you and telling God that you accept Jesus, you believe Jesus died on the cross to pay the price for your sins, and you want to go to heaven when you die. Some call this "accepting Christ," other call it the "sinner's prayer," and still others call it "getting saved," being "born again," or being "converted". ----edit---- The book goes on to talk about examples of the bible and how Jesus himself told people they would reach heaven. ------------ Just read the story because a good story has a powerful way of rescuing us from abstract theological discussions that can tie us up in knots for years. Excellent point. In Luke 7 we read a story about a Roman centurion who sends a message to Jesus, telling him that all he has to do is say the word and the centurion's sick servant will be healed. Jesus is amazed at the man's confidence in him, and turning to the crowd following him, he says, "I tell you I have not found such great faith even in Israel." Then in Luke 18, Jesus tells a story about two people who go to the temple to pray. The one prays about how glad he is to not be a sinner like other people, while the other stands at a distance and says, "God have mercy on me, a sinner." And then in Luke 23 the man hanging on the cross next to Jesus says to him, "Remember me when you come into your kingdom," and Jesus assures him that they'll be together in paradise. So the first story the centurion gives a speech about how authority works, in the second story the man praying asks for mercy, and in the third story the man ask to be remembered at a future date in time. In the first case Jesus isn't just accepting and approving, he's amazed. And in the second case, he states that the man's words put him in standing with God than God's own people. And in the third case, the man is promised that later that very day he will be with Jesus in "paradise." So is it what you say that saves you? But then in John 3 Jesus tells a man named Nocodemus that if he wants to see "the kingdom of God" he must be "born again." ------edit----- -------------- And then in Mathew 6, Jesus is teaching the disciples how to pray, and he says that if they forgive others, then God will forgive the, and if they don't forgive others God won't forgive them. Then in Mathew 7, Jesus explains, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord Lord,' will enter the kingdom, but only those who do the will of my Father." And in Mathew 10 he teaches that "those who stand firm til the end will be saved" So do we have to forgive others, do the will of the Father, or "stand firm" to be accepted by God. Which is it? --------------------------- Anyway, Bell then goes on to give plenty of other examples of what Jesus himself said about to be saved or reach the Kingdom of God, and how they are all different. He goes on to talk about the kind of things Jesus message have in common, and how they all require action in the here and now, and would lead followers to act in a way that makes earth a more heavenly place right now. It seems the jist of it is about worrying more about living like Christ and following his teachings than worrying about who will go to heaven and hell and who won't, and why that kind of thinking isn't necessarily even biblically sound. It's really interesting because he's a very successful pastor, and scholar on the bible. The book has also upset a lot of more fundamental Christians. It isn't really even new stuff, but he puts it in a way that's very easy to digest. If you aren't totally bored by this, and want me to go more in depth, you can always email me, and I'll do my best.
I'm not advocating any suppression of free speech or opinion. I'm just saying atheists trying "convert" Muslims or Christians or whatever is a waste of their time. Punishing atheisism is what theocratic nations do. Ironically enough, some of the atheists I know are more forgiving of these extremist theocracies than they are of the local community church. Or they feign admiration for leaders of more "exotic" religions.
Religions, political parties, people lose focus so easily. Sometimes we forget to concentrate on the donut rather than the hole. All factions do stupid stuff because that is man's nature. Personally, I wish to thank all those who prayed for me or sent positive thoughts winging through time and space. I came back strong after open heart surgery, but I was cocky and tried to do much. I fell in the back yard giving my dog his 5:30 a.m. morning break. As I lay there until a neighbor spotted me -- she was putting out my garbage can for me -- I thought about what a good life I've had and how that life would never have been possible without family and friends and a loving God. But I'd like to share with you that the power of prayer -- or positive thinking -- is of enormous value.
People pray in order to make themselves feel better and as a coping mechanism in general. I see nothing wrong with that.
Wow... Take it easy Thumbs and recover. No need to push yourself so much coming back from open heart surgery.
I have a question here. For those who don't believe and / or critical of Christianity how many of here do so over the issue that Non-Christians will go to Hell or at least not go to Heaven?
I can't speak for all non-believers, but personally the Heaven & Hell stuff doesn't bother me, considering I don't believe in it. I think most of us are bothered by the way people's beliefs inform their actions while we're all still alive on this planet.
I have not a single problem with other people having their own beliefs. I might discuss it and debate it with them, but it's purely an academic exrecise: I don't think I'm really going to change anyone's mind. What bugs me is when those who believe try to force their beliefs on those who don't. That's not what religion should be about, and it's DEFINITELY not what Christianity is about.
Where do you people live that so many people of faith are forcing their beliefs on you? Utah? Vatican City? Jerusalem? Riyadh?
