Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Well it was a nice thread
Nothing like tolerance for open discourse...
Deconstructing from Fundamental Christianity
64,898 Views |
1255 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by TexasScientist
Nothing like tolerance for open discourse...
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
ShooterTX
I'll take a stab at responding to this. With all the original disciples being uneducated and speaking Aramaic, and the earliest manuscripts being written in Greek, many believe that the original disciples did not actually write the four gospels. Nor do the authors of the gospels claim to be one (I'll add that there are some arguments for John).ShooterTX said:
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
Over the 30-60 year period before the Gospels were recorded as manuscripts, the powerful story of Jesus was passed down and shared as an Oral story until it was eventually recorded in Greek. This is not a radical belief, but something thought by the majority of scholars, theologians, anthropologists, etc.
If you research oral studies, you will find that, naturally, humans tend to emphasize different parts of the story and add/leave parts out. That's why if you read all four gospels side by side, you will find discrepancies that are not just simple grammar differences, but completely different conclusions and historical events.
I don't believe it is unique or heretical to say that not all red words in the New Testament are literal English translations of the words of Jesus. Instead, I tend to focus on the overall message of the particular Gospel I am reading and meditate on these things.
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
ShooterTX
I hope this helps. The key disconnect is the definition of "true." For post-Enlightenment Americans, we approach truth from a scientific or historical perspective. This would have been a completely foreign concept to ANE writers or hearers of the Gospel. I think the story of Jonah is a great example. The hearers of that story would have found it to be "true" regardless of whether a man named Jonah was literally swallowed and regurgitated by a whale or big fish. The ANE culture arguably had a much deeper and broader concept of what was "true" that was not limited by science, reason, or literally reality. Same with the Creation narratives - I believe they are "true" in the ultimate, theological science unincumbered by having two believe there were literally two people who had two children (boys) and got tricked by a snake.ShooterTX said:
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
That's where I think the "biblical inerrancy" crowd made an error by equating biblical inerrancy with scientific or historical inerrancy. I can believe the Bible is without error and perfectly true without limiting that to a literal scientific, post-Enlightenment framework. That being said, it is a slippery slope, which is what has occurred on the liberal theology side against which the fundamentalist reacted ... once you believe the Creation Narrative is not literal it is a short jump to Jesus did not actually exist. (And before you ask, I do not have a good, perfect, pithy answer).
ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
ShooterTX
ShooterTX said:
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
I guess I dont see how one is reliant on the other. The Bible is a document based on oral tradition, the earliest book was written 40 or so years after Jesus death.
Also, it is common that stories are used to teach. Do you think the Iroquois really believed the world is on the back of a turtle?
So why does the Bible have to be 100% historically accurate to belief in Christ's teachings? Historic sure, I believe the Jews left Egypt. Moses is historic, did he really separate the Red Sea? I am sure he found a ford that may have not been usable by the Egyptians who tried anyway at their peril. Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?
RMF5630: "Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?"
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Oldbear83 said:
RMF5630: "Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?"
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
Yes, but that does not mean I literally believe in the Tower of Babel story.
Why not? Got a better reason for humans suddenly - archaeologically speaking - spreading out from North Africa to populate Asia, Europe, etc. ?RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
RMF5630: "Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?"
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
Yes, but that does not mean I literally believe in the Tower of Babel story.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
LIB,MR BEARS said:how appropriate that I came across this, this morning. Several things you bring up are addressed here:BaylorJacket said:
I am curious to see if there are any other bears out there who have deconstructed in the past or are currently in the process of deconstructing from their religion.
I personally grew up as a fundamental, evangelical Christian, and over the past year or so have had the time to actually reflect on what I believe. After going through a process of deconstruction and then reconstruction, my faith looks very different from a few years ago, but I am more rooted in my love & respect for Christ than ever before.
Here is just a high level view of some of the things that were challenging for me, and curious to hear if anyone also struggles with the same topics:
- Evolution - coming to the acceptance that Genesis is not a historical textbook on the formation of the universe, and that to not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution by the majority of Christian churches is head scratching
- Hell - I struggled (and still do) on the concept of hell. How a normal human being deserves to be tortured for infinite time for simply not believing in X, Y, Z
- Salvation - Similar to hell, but do un-reached people really deserve to be separated from God forever for simply being born to a particular geographic location?
- Historical Jesus - Scholars and theologians who have dedicated their lives to studying Jesus now are quite certain that Jesus believed and taught Apocalypticism, and did not even consider himself to be God. This obviously does not mesh well with fundamental Christian teaching.
- The Bible being inerrant - There are more variations in the original manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.
47, watch this video. He describes your theology.
I posted this earlier in the thread but it was directed at someone else. I think you will appreciate it.
it still is.Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Well it was a nice thread
I remember reading something about false witnesses and wolves in sheep's clothing. I just don't recall what book I was reading. Maybe you can help me.
Baylorjacket, can you point out some of these discrepancies you are talking about when you said "... if you read all four gospels side by side, you will find discrepancies that are not just simple grammar differences, but completely different conclusions and historical events."
LIB,MR BEARS said:
Baylorjacket, can you point out some of these discrepancies you are talking about when you said "... if you read all four gospels side by side, you will find discrepancies that are not just simple grammar differences, but completely different conclusions and historical events."
Here are some off the top of my head:
- Where Jesus was born
- Jesus' divinity
- What day was the last supper
- Who found the empty tomb, who did they see, and who did they tell?
- How did Judas die (and how the Field of Blood was named)
ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
I understand your point, and it does sound very reasonable... but all it really does is poke holes in the idea itself of a Messiah.RMF5630 said:ShooterTX said:
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
I guess I dont see how one is reliant on the other. The Bible is a document based on oral tradition, the earliest book was written 40 or so years after Jesus death.
Also, it is common that stories are used to teach. Do you think the Iroquois really believed the world is on the back of a turtle?
So why does the Bible have to be 100% historically accurate to belief in Christ's teachings? Historic sure, I believe the Jews left Egypt. Moses is historic, did he really separate the Red Sea? I am sure he found a ford that may have not been usable by the Egyptians who tried anyway at their peril. Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?
Why do you need a Savior if there is no such thing as Hell? No such thing as judgement? If so many things that the Bible calls sin, are actually not sin... then how do you really decide what is or is not sin? Why does the entire concept of sin need to exist?
If the words of Jesus, when he spoke about Noah and Moses and Abraham are not literal... then how do you know which words are literal?
If the Bible is full of "oral traditions" and none of it is actually truth... then how do you know and understand the character of God? The Bible is the only place known to man, where you can find writings about who God is and what He is like. It is the only place where we can go to read and understand Him. If you say that all of this is actually from church traditions and oral history... then you are saying that there is no way to actually know for sure. One guy says one thing and another guy says another thing... and either one might be correct even though they are mutually exclusive... so which is right? How do you decide? Is it just whichever one you like or agree with the most?
ShooterTX
I have it on good authority that God is a 5'8" white guy that loves Baylor football and basketball. He is also a big aviation and waterskiing nut. (Hey! So am I)
He really never condemned selfishness as we understand it.
He really never condemned selfishness as we understand it.
I heard He has a ginormous hand-spanLIB,MR BEARS said:
I have it on good authority that God is a 5'8" white guy that loves Baylor football and basketball. He is also a big aviation and waterskiing nut. (Hey! So am I)
He really never condemned selfishness as we understand it.
and that's the problem... you basically can believe whatever you want, and call it "Christianity"... so why even bother with a label?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
ShooterTX
I throw a flag on that. All you have to do is ask Shooter.BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
Everybody else picks out the scriptures they think are important. Actually everyone does it though some claim to have it all figured out.
And of course if you dont believe like Shooter you cant be a real Christian.
I have found theres only two ways to go:
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Oldbear83 said:Why not? Got a better reason for humans suddenly - archaeologically speaking - spreading out from North Africa to populate Asia, Europe, etc. ?RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
RMF5630: "Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?"
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
Yes, but that does not mean I literally believe in the Tower of Babel story.
That there was a tower that made it so everyone couldn't understand all languages?
That makes more sense than a story to teach a lesson of not putting man's abilities ahead of Gods?
" if you dont believe like Shooter you cant be a real Christian."
I don't recall ever seeing a post from Shooter saying that, can you show me where he has?
Speaking for myself, I will follow the Lord who made Himself known to me personally.
I don't recall ever seeing a post from Shooter saying that, can you show me where he has?
Speaking for myself, I will follow the Lord who made Himself known to me personally.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
ShooterTX said:and that's the problem... you basically can believe whatever you want, and call it "Christianity"... so why even bother with a label?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
There is a major difference between unity and uniformity. There are thousands of sects of Christianity who believe that their interpretation of the Bible is correct.
Can we not have unity together in Christ and pursue a life producing fruit? The flood being real or not doesn't impact my faith, there is truth regardless.
Bible remains the best, most authentic source I know on that question.RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:Why not? Got a better reason for humans suddenly - archaeologically speaking - spreading out from North Africa to populate Asia, Europe, etc. ?RMF5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
RMF5630: "Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?"
I believe if that were the point, the book would have called the Book of Moses, and the entire Old Testament would amount to little more than a Levitical Manifesto.
Serious question: Have you ever personally experienced a miracle?
Yes, but that does not mean I literally believe in the Tower of Babel story.
That there was a tower that made it so everyone couldn't understand all languages?
That makes more sense than a story to teach a lesson of not putting man's abilities ahead of Gods?
Feel free to believe some of it, I choose to believe all of it.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
"In the essentials, unity. In the non-essentials, liberty. And in all things, charity."BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:and that's the problem... you basically can believe whatever you want, and call it "Christianity"... so why even bother with a label?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
There is a major difference between unity and uniformity. There are thousands of sects of Christianity who believe that their interpretation of the Bible is correct.
Can we not have unity together in Christ and pursue a life producing fruit? The flood being real or not doesn't impact my faith, there is truth regardless.
(or somesuch)
Alistair Begg, a Scotsman who pastors a church in Cleveland says something that I really like regarding Christian doctrines; "The plain things are the main things and the main things are the plain things."BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:and that's the problem... you basically can believe whatever you want, and call it "Christianity"... so why even bother with a label?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:So how do you decide what is literal and what is not literal?BaylorJacket said:ShooterTX said:
so you read the Bible and study the Bible, even though you do not believe it to be accurate?
I believe we have different definitions and requirements for something to be accurate. I never said the Bible was not accurate. I see the Bible as a collection of incredible books spanning over thousands of years of people pursing the same God as me. These books contain literal history, parables, suffering, love, questioning, and together reveal a loving God.
I read and study the Bible, and call myself a Christian & Christ follower. I however do not believe every single thing in the Bible to be literal.
As soon as I figure that out I'll let you know
In all seriousness though, there is no way of truly ever knowing.
There is a major difference between unity and uniformity. There are thousands of sects of Christianity who believe that their interpretation of the Bible is correct.
Can we not have unity together in Christ and pursue a life producing fruit? The flood being real or not doesn't impact my faith, there is truth regardless.
I think it is pretty well understood we are all sinners and in need of a savior.
Not to be too picky, but Moses parted the Sea of Reeds. In Exodus, the original Hebrew is Yam Suph. Yam being Hebrew for Sea and Suph being Hebrew for Reeds.RMF5630 said:
So why does the Bible have to be 100% historically accurate to belief in Christ's teachings? Historic sure, I believe the Jews left Egypt. Moses is historic, did he really separate the Red Sea? I am sure he found a ford that may have not been usable by the Egyptians who tried anyway at their peril. Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?
The error occurred when Exodus was translated into another language. It's just a coincidence that "red" and "reed" are similar in English. It's been like this for so long that it has stuck. Some Bibles will list this as a footnote.
Why don't you believe Jesus when he said people will suffer in Gehenna? Gehenna is a literal place. But people aren't there right now. It is the Valley of the Son of Himmon. It is the garbage dump outside of Jerusalem in which fires burned all the time to burn the refuse. It is also a place of abomination in which child sacrifices occurred. It is not what Dante envisioned. Jesus was saying something different and uniquely understood by Jews at that time.ShooterTX said:
I really don't understand how anyone can claim to be a Christian, but then say that the Bible isn't really all that true. The Bible has to be more than just a book of good ideas or good values... otherwise there isn't a point to it.
If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot deny the existence of Hell, because Jesus established the existence of Hell. Jesus validates the story of Noah, which is usually the one that trips up a lot of folks, and he also talks about many of the other great heroes of the Bible. And then there is the life of Jesus, complete with miracles and the resurrection itself.
So if you do not believe that any of this is true... then what parts of the Bible do you believe? And why would you believe any of it, if so much of it is a lie? How can you believe any of the words of Jesus, if you discard so much of what He said?
I would really like a decent explanation of how someone claims to follow Jesus, if they also do not believe the Bible is true... please.
You interpret a literal place on earth as a spiritual prison of torment. I don't.
That is how it works. We all place onto the text our own interpretation. When you read Jesus's words you interpret it differently than I do. It is not that I don't believe the Bible is true. It's that I don't believe "your" interpretation is truth. However, I do think we can learn together and grow in faith as we bring our interpretations to the faith community. Sadly, this is often met with claims of heresy and condemnation. And some people on this board are downright mean to brothers (pastors) they disagree with.
Have you ever considered that your defense of the truth of the Bible is kind of like the pharisees defense of the law? Both are meant to point to God. But the law and the Bible are NOT God.
By the way, which is more miraculous? A virgin birth of a child or the virgin birth of the universe? I've gotten a few smiles from atheists when I ask them that. When we move past whether virginity needs to be believed (for me or for them), we can get to a better question - how do we express love for one another and live on this crazy planet?
TL;DR: We both read the same thing but believe something different about it.
Dig and be dug.
Coke Bear said:Not to be too picky, but Moses parted the Sea of Reeds. In Exodus, the original Hebrew is Yam Suph. Yam being Hebrew for Sea and Suph being Hebrew for Reeds.RMF5630 said:
So why does the Bible have to be 100% historically accurate to belief in Christ's teachings? Historic sure, I believe the Jews left Egypt. Moses is historic, did he really separate the Red Sea? I am sure he found a ford that may have not been usable by the Egyptians who tried anyway at their peril. Dont you think the point is that the Jews escaped and got to Israel?
The error occurred when Exodus was translated into another language. It's just a coincidence that "red" and "reed" are similar in English. It's been like this for so long that it has stuck. Some Bibles will list this as a footnote.
Hey. Cecil D Deville said the Red Sea. So who am I to argue.
Much better said than I ever could. Can I pin this to the OP? Lol. Hope you have a blessed day.
This may be a bit off topic but if anyone wants to learn how to memorize scripture the us memory championships are coming up on July 30th. You can get a book such as Remember IT by Nelson dellis and lean how to train for some of the events. You can sign up at usamemorychampionship.com. I've found the memory techniques to be great for memorizing scripture, physics/calculus equations and just about anything you want. (Even football stats.)
A my way or the highway approach isn't fundamental Christian. God has always given us a choice whether or not to follow him. We just have to continue to be salt and light to a dying world.Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
My outlook started to change about 10 years ago. I still read the Bible daily. I have stopped trying to get people to conform to a "my way or the highway" and try to respect others. I try to lead my life as a good example by helping people that need it and sharing my talents with those that can benefit. I dont think my works will get me to heaven but it makes it easier for me to live. I believe in hell but dont think a loving God would damn a person that never had the chance to accept Christ. I have no idea what heaven will be like. I have never heard a description I think I would enjoy.
Theres a lot of things I dont understand.
If science was able to answer the question of how life came from inanimate matter, I might agree. But we both know that question hasn't been answered (and IMO, never will, outside of intelligent design).TexasScientist said:I agree with all of what you wrote. We have a similar journey, and after looking deeply into all of the points you made I came to the same conclusion. Further, from a purely scientific perspective, the existence of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic god, or the god of any other religion for that matter, is highly improbable. I first began to question Christianity from what I learned while taking religion classes at Baylor. Science took me further down a path that follows the evidence of reality. Science doesn't support religious claims. There is nothing about this universe that requires a supernatural being to explain anything. And, the concept of Yahweh/Jesus being an all loving, all powerful god is inconsistent with the god described in the OT and NT. An all loving, all powerful god wouldn't have created mankind (innocent men, women, and children) and other life on this planet to suffer, nor would he sentence mankind to an afterlife in eternal damnation due to error of birth, or for failure to believe in what is unbelievable - an intangible, hidden god. An all powerful, and all loving god would not allow what is taking place in Ukraine.BaylorJacket said:
I am curious to see if there are any other bears out there who have deconstructed in the past or are currently in the process of deconstructing from their religion.
I personally grew up as a fundamental, evangelical Christian, and over the past year or so have had the time to actually reflect on what I believe. After going through a process of deconstruction and then reconstruction, my faith looks very different from a few years ago, but I am more rooted in my love & respect for Christ than ever before.
Here is just a high level view of some of the things that were challenging for me, and curious to hear if anyone also struggles with the same topics:
- Evolution - coming to the acceptance that Genesis is not a historical textbook on the formation of the universe, and that to not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution by the majority of Christian churches is head scratching
- Hell - I struggled (and still do) on the concept of hell. How a normal human being deserves to be tortured for infinite time for simply not believing in X, Y, Z
- Salvation - Similar to hell, but do un-reached people really deserve to be separated from God forever for simply being born to a particular geographic location?
- Historical Jesus - Scholars and theologians who have dedicated their lives to studying Jesus now are quite certain that Jesus believed and taught Apocalypticism, and did not even consider himself to be God. This obviously does not mesh well with fundamental Christian teaching.
- The Bible being inerrant - There are more variations in the original manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.
These are not contradictions. Virtually every alleged contradiction in the NT is just omission or different emphasis. Spend 15 minutes researching how folks told stories in those days - what they said, omitted, and why. It's fascinating. It was common to omit seemingly pertinent people, places, and events from narratives, while today that does not happen, at least intentionally. Today, if someone had dinner with the President and Putin, it would be unthinkable to omit one. But, in those days, that would be common if one of the two had nothing to do with the point of the story.BaylorJacket said:LIB,MR BEARS said:
Baylorjacket, can you point out some of these discrepancies you are talking about when you said "... if you read all four gospels side by side, you will find discrepancies that are not just simple grammar differences, but completely different conclusions and historical events."
Here are some off the top of my head:
- Where Jesus was born
- Jesus' divinity
- What day was the last supper
- Who found the empty tomb, who did they see, and who did they tell?
- How did Judas die (and how the Field of Blood was named)
Some ostensible discrepancies are more difficult than others, and Passover is one. One common explanation is that Passover, much like Christmas, was considered a season, not necessarily one particular day, in describing related events.