Question for Christians

[ConGregation]

We can argue textual history for... well... another history. I just want to point out that the Gospels weren't written like the Odyssey. Matthew and John were actual eyewitnesses. Luke and Mark lived in an age when they could talk to eyewitnesses. Matthew was a tax collector so Im sure he was literate. Maybe they all weren't but maybe they were. Obviously Matthew and John were.

 

Questioning one's own faith and questioning God is two totally different things. Searching out the Bible is a great thing. But I guarantee that all the hard questions will never be answered completely to your satisfaction. Many things I don't understand. Many things I struggle with. But I have certain peace that the Bible is the Word of God. A lot of the things I just have to trust God about. Like I said earlier, I cant explain election/free will. I cant explain why a bleeding sacrifice can in reality cleanse me from my sins. I just trust God on that one. Again, His ways are past finding out and his thoughts are far beyond my thoughts.

[Playaa]

Knight....ya beat me

 

couple things:

1) I didn't understand what you were saying in your origional post and therefore went the wrong direction

2) yes my information is mostly second hand (but who's isn't? how many of us lived during the time of Christ's life?)

3) I am not afraid to question my faith.....I have constantly questioned my faith and every single time have only been strengthened. The reason I rarely give up (*edit* by "give up" I mean back down */edit*) when I don't understand is because I understand that I will most likely never understand.....understand?

basically I could never not believe in God....I could never not believe in Christ....not because I'm closed minded but because I am 100% positive in everything I've ever seen that Christ was the son of God.........now the little parts inside of Christianity (baptism, tongues, losing salvation, etc.) those I still question daily.....but there is nothing that could make me disbelieve in Christ....because I know it's true.

some people will think that's arrogant and say that I need to be open minded....but I say they're just as close minded by saying I'm wrong in knowing I'm 100% right............

 

and that was an odd statement......

Edited September 22, 2003 by Playaa/Pselus

[Crowbar]

Watchtower said: what is the cold hard evidence that there is a god? I believe it is all mostly speculation, stories and scientific theories and experiments. Pick your poison?

 

Jesus said: (to Thomas) "You believe because you have seen, blessed is he who believes without seeing."

 

Faith is the foundation of Christian life. I have faith that Jesus is who he says he is, namely, the son of God. I have faith that I have been made pure and can now enter into God's paradise that he created for me.

 

Yet my faith is not blind faith. Jesus doesn't ask for blind faith. We have the Bible, which I believe is his literal word. Jesus will gladdly have a personal relationship with anyone who seeks him, he'll make himself felt. Throughout history there are stories of people's encounters with God.

 

As far as the Bible, NO part of it has EVER been proven wrong. No matter how far fetched some of the stories seem, they've never, ever been found wrong in any detail. God promised that he would defend his word, and so far, he has done so.

 

Watch, you also said that if Jesus came down and performed miracles once a week, everyone on earth would believe. The fact is, they wouldn't. No way they would. People are negative, sceptical, cynical idiots. It was the same in Jesus's time. He did miracles then. Some people believed in him, but most didn't. If he came down to earth every week, pretty soon we'd run him off as a fake, or we'd just crucify him again. He'll be back one more time, but the show will only last one night, and you'll see it or you won't. No second chance.

 

Finally, doesn't it take more faith to believe God isn't real, then to believe he is? After all, God was, until a man started pretending he wasn't.

[White Knight]

I gotta agree with you there Playaa.

 

Studying science, history, biology, philosophy and even evolution makes it next to impossible to deny the existence of God. I mean look at microbiology and the complexities of the simplest life forms...how can one deny that it was originally manufactured by a higher power rather than through mutation and randomness formed over eons.

 

As for the makeup of the New Testament, we must agree to disagree. Of the gospel's, that I am aware of, only the Validity of Mathew can be tracked to w/in a generation of the Jesus's time (20 years after the events IIRC). The revelation that the New Testament was likely not written by the people that the church claims it was (John was a fisherman and more than likely illiterate...) brings up great questions of faith...which can be answered, and IMHO raise faith...but they require conscious thought.

 

My questions were really meant to make people think...especially the last one (what makes our 'mythology' not silly?). Course, I cannot claim the credit for that question...you should thank Kevin Smith for it. Too often I believe that people do not THINK about what their religion says...they merely go along with what they are told.

 

I guess...like I say about Americans in general...Sheep!

[auggybendoggy]

White,

brother I agree with you. The opeining question you propose is one tension that I don't think anyone but the cruel minded calvinist can answer and yet hold consisten theology.

 

To extend it out a bit from people who never heard the gospel...What about babies that die. Or dumb people who die in their defect.

does their lack of calling on the name of God for salvation doom them to hell for all eternity...heak even for 1 year?

 

I learned in a Methodist church and baptist that there is a thing called "the age of accountability" yet I've never been shown this passage.

I've heard the arguments about OT law but it did not deal with salvation (to my knowledge). What I do know is that most of us hold the position that if you deny Christ as the son of God then you are dust.

 

I feel that we add to the scriptures when we need to. In order to make our biased ideas work with our thoughts of who God is, we make adjustments and then find scriptures to build a circumstantial foundation.

 

I'm convinced we know VERY little.

 

From what I understand from others (though I have never studied his teachings) Ghandi may very well be in heaven.

 

I used to take that doctrine about denying Christ a to simple (or shall I say at face value). Yet when it came to John 3:16, it was not good enough for a person just to believe in order to receive eternal life (I could not take this at face value). So I found myself wondering about everyone who loves God...are they the same as me?

 

Interesting that Jesus says about the church

many will come on that day and say lord we did these miracles in your name...and I'll say I never knew you

 

Yet in Matt 25

For in as much as you've done it to the least of my brethren You've done it unto me.

 

The people in Matt 25 didn't do it in the name of Jesus. Yet they are saved. Interesting Huh?

 

I don't think the Bibles is a scientific book or historical measuring tape. I believe it contains the information to know God and to be like him

in order to meet a true measure of love. Whether one book says Jesus was sitting on a rock and another book says a log doesn't matter to me

what does matter is what he said.

 

But when all is said and done I found myself struggling to understand. I have a tendency to lean liberal and to allow homosexuality a place in christianity...yet I am uneasy with it. I simply don't know. To be literal with every passage puts me on the spot with other passages or issues.

I found myslef picking and choosing....How very dumb I am.

 

Well anyhow, just some thoughts.

 

Auggybendoggy

[Watchtower]

To extend it out a bit from people who never heard the gospel...What about babies that die.  Or dumb people who die in their defect.

does their lack of calling on the name of God for salvation doom them to hell for all eternity...heak even for 1 year?

This has been discussed here before..

1 point I'm going to pose before this thread gets out of hand Crowbar mentions faith, blind faith and the bible. Ok, people say all the time that jesus speaks to them, or God does miracles etc. This is the cold hard evidence i speak of! People like to say too that the Christian God knows no bounds and we can't even imagine why or how he could work, yet his teachings all originate from this plain white piece of paper with ancient(not even) writing! Why hasn't anyone told me that God has answered a prayer or shown you a sign or something like many poeple believe actually happens? What do we actually believe? Answer? Everyone is going to believe a little different. Take bits and pieces here, quips and quotes here, facts and theories. Throw some God and the Maker in with some science and logical/scientific thinking in and you have a Wide spectrum of personal beliefs. Everyone thinks they're right. Why can't we say, "you know, that really makes me think", or "Yeah i can see how you'd think that way." Open our eyes to All possibilities. Alien life, prehistoric(non-biblical) animals and events. How does that work into the bible? Lets start here.. What is this? http://dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu/~pgore/stude...gar/erectus.htm

[dwEEziL]

Well, I have personally seen healings. I know a guy who had broke his leg the week before get prayed over and removed the cast and his leg was now fine. I also saw a guy roll his ankle during basketball. Writhing in pain on the ground we all layed hands on him and prayed and he was healed. He got up and continued to play unhinders. His ankle was as big as a softball but within 2 hours it was back to normal.

 

I am sure some can try to explain these away but I was personally present for both incidents. Sometimes, things happen that aren't explainable but people try to rationalize it away.

 

Also, you guys are all my bros so don't worry about offending me cuz it won't happen and I hope that I don't say anthing that offends you cuz that ain't my goal or desire.

[Crowbar]

I refrain from putting up stories of healings and testimonies of audible conversation with God, partly because they usually are dismissed immediatly by most people, and partly because I have trouble believing some myself. Too many people are out selling their story of how God spoke to them, or took them to heaven and showed them around, then sent them back to earth.

I have personally been in prayer services where the presence of God was unmistakable, people were being effected all around me. I have felt his presence on me once or twice.

Healings that I have seen personally, a friend with breast cancer, not expected to live much more than a few months, healed completely. A young girl took a bad spill off her skates and messed up her eye. The doc said she wouldn't see out of it again. We prayed for her, and at the next appointment the doc took off the bandage and she could see fine. My dad had a bad fall while waterskiing. He hit the water face first at about 34 mph. When you're back on one ski crossing a wake (he did tournament skiing) you're going over twice as fast as the boat, so his head was going over 60 mph when he hit the water. He was concious, laying there face down in the water, but he couldn't turn himself over to breath. My brother and the friend that was driving the boat knew something was wrong when he didn't wave to signal he was fine. My brother had to dive in and pull him into the boat. He was airlifted to the hospital for neck injuries. I didn't find out till later that night, my mother called to tell me my father was in the hospital and might be parylized from the neck down. After a night of much prayer by our church, he was released. Only a small tingle and some weakness in his hands remained of an injury that could have put him in a wheelchair.

All these things can be explained away or can be accepted as miracles. Having an open mind means acknowleding the possibility that it just might have been a work of God, not trying hard to find an explanation that discounts a miracle.

[auggybendoggy]

Go Arnold Schwartzeneggar!!!

[auggybendoggy]

How does that work into the bible?  Lets start here..  What is this?  http://dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu/~pgore/stude...gar/erectus.htm

Watch,

I read the link. How the heak to they know this "homo-erectus" guy used fire, big game hunting. Heak if they don't have a whole lot on Jesus from 2000 years ago how they gonna have any info on this cat when he was 2,000,000 years ago? Seems like some information of this person is speculation. Perhaps I'm wrong and this homo guy wrote a big ol novel : )

 

Auggy

[Playaa]

I gotta go with something Auggy said there....

you don't find it SLIGHTLY odd that we have 2,000 year old evidence of the miracles and wonders that Jesus did and he's still touted as a "good man" and not the Son of God like he said.....but then we have a SKULL (and 1 nearly full skeleton that looks the same as any human skeleton except for the skull) of a creature that doesn't look exactly like a man or a monkey from supposedly 2 MILLION years ago and it's touted as FACT that it was a missing link in evolution? You don't see that as odd at all?

I'm sorry but it's thought processes like this that DRIVE ME CRAZY!

Do you know that one of the supposed "missing links" between man and monkey was built ENTIRELY from a jawbone and hip bone found MILES APART! 1 jawbone and 1 hipbone found far apart and they "build" an entire being out of it and say it's a missing link (these statements are off the top of my head and could be wrong although the general idea is correct...there was a "missing link" built in that way)...

My coworker is a VERY heavy browed man....in fact his brow is nearly as heavy as those drawings of missing links.....

does that mean he's a missing link? or an evolutionary backslide? No...he's a programmer...totally different thing ( ) and he's also 100% human even though you could put him in a loincloth and give him a tan and get a perfect specimen for a missing link...

I find it odd that Evolution couldn't explain people like him away....the idea behind evolution is that we evolve what isn't necessary out of the system....if we are the evolution of "Homo Erectus" then why does he appear to be just like him? I'm not trying to insult this man by the way he's a great guy....but the first time I saw him I actually thought he was the actor who played "Jaws" in the James Bond movies.

[Watchtower]

THats my point exactly. I'm glad you realize it. THe fact that you think your programmer buddy looks like a neandertal is exactly what prepares for the realization the evolution is real. We Have to be related to these(not just homo erectus) fossils because we look so much alike! Imagine if you will several tribes of these creatures(and most more ape-like) foraging and hunting in ancient africa or whereever they were found. THe beginnings of modern civilization. You say it's a "back-slide" but in fact Homo Sapien(us) Is forwardly evolved given the bigger brain capacity skull and facial features etc. http://neuro.psychologie.uni-oldenburg.de/...ralisierung.pdf

I encourage all to scroll through this whole thing quick. i'm not trying to dispell God here in any way. In fact, I find it amazing in the thought of how evolution could possibly work(a higher being?) and adapt all of us living creatures "on the fly". Morph us into what is best suited for our environment(animals:long necks, flat snouts, long skinny beaks). I don't know. Another thing about evolution is that you don't just transform from one thing to another. It's more of a slide. We've named many specimens and draw a map accordingly, but that dosen't mean there is nothing else between each variation. How long and hard have we even been trying to look for this stuff? Do you think we've found it all? You also say something about only a jaw and how do we know it used fire. Well todays forensics allow us to paint a pretty complete picture of a skull or skeleton given Very limited information. There are formulas and guidelines they follow to do so. is it completely accurate? I'm not sure, but I'd bet my bottom dollar it's pretty darn close. Evidence determined in this manner is proof enough to convict and sentence a person to death in our current system. Plus there are alot more than just 1 jaw bone. Many fossilized remains. ANd if you find burn sticks in a formed pile near these fossils, you could probablt deduce that something stacked them and it caught fire somehow. A rat or any other creature that lived back then? I doubt it. http://www.china.org.cn/e-gudai/1.htm <-- gives a little info on early mans use of fire(must read if you've come this far). That's enough for now. I'm going to start another thread beacuase I dont want this to turn into a Christianity bash. Please get back to topic here..

[Playaa]

you missed my point entirely...I didn't "realize" anything.

I was saying evolution is an idiotic notion because the idea behind it is that we change and only get better yet my friend here has features resembling what is SAID to be another species....if evolution were true then those features would have evolved out of him and you wouldn't be seeing them in a distant relative millions of years later.

 

if you're interested in something mind blowing....check out a DNA molecule...evolution can't even begin to explain how it could have happened other than......"well it just did...isn't that weird?"

[auggybendoggy]

Watch, I do appreciate your ideas. I too sympathize with alot of arguments from the evolution side. Some christians believe in theistic evolution which states that God controls evolution and that it is organized by him. I know most fundamentalists (conservatives) reject the view. I myself do not know enough to form an opinion.

 

My one issue I can't resolve with evolution is it's speed of progression. Seems that man got real smart somewhere about 6000-8000 years ago in sumer and other areas. Math and writings appeared. before this you had more simple writings. If Evolution is true why do we not have languages and writings from millions of years ago unless mans evolution is exceedingly faster than normal. If we evolved from monkeys and they find a fossil 2,000,000 years old

then shouldn't he have been smart enough 200,000 years ago to talk and write? Instead you see a burst of complex writings and math. I'd like to see stuff thats only 50,000 years old yet it's never found. I would think that objects 50,000 years old would be in better shape than 2,000,000.

 

Perhaps my lack of evolutin study is evident. Perhaps there are plenty of fossils of man 50,000 years old. I'm simply stating my opinion on limited knowledge. I do tend to think though that we would find younger fossils more fequent than older ones.

 

Any thoughts anyone, I may be totally wack to think this?

 

Auggybendoggy

[Watchtower]

http://www.pureinsight.org/pi/articles/200.../9/16/1065.html <--- A website I just came across.. Pretty interesting. Fossils of all ages are being found.. As early as 10,000 years, as old as 3.5 Billion years(?) 1 take on how Man "all of the sudden" got smart. Imagine a time when we weren't at the top of the food chain. Large wooly mammoths, sabretooth tigers and many other huge predators. Our focus wasn't necessarily to sit and ponder our lives away. We were busy adapting and making a way in a less civilized manner. As the world turned and animal populations died out, our focuses started changing. We had more time amongst ourselves to interact and stimulate our minds. Make tools. Develope trade systems. Farm. Math and writing are't the only marks of advancing intelligence. We naturally became more intelligent and social opening up a whole new can of worms. And keep in mind that "all of the sudden" could possibly be millions of years.... And this is also My opinion as the what Could have happened.. Not stating to necessarily be fact. http://www.ahajokes.com/crt608.html <--hehe 2 million of 3.5 billion? A wink of an eye

[auggybendoggy]

If fossils are being found from all different ages then this will be the missing link. Certainly you will find differences between men bones or animal...half alligator half kangaroo...half man half monkey....half elephant half platypus : )

 

You would think that you would find strange looking creatures. If indeed evolution is a change from one creature to another then all fossils would be different. possibly with such intermediate species it might be impossible to tell which bones belong to what.

My point being, you should find intermediate creatures that had been devoloping from one species to another dinasoaur to a bird...

monkey to man...rat to kangaroo. If you did have these then certainly there bones would be different in scale. Seems like the puncual equlibrium theory is more stable to me. I believe thats when a Crocadile lays an egg and out of the egg comes a penguin. However

I don't buy PE theory. So I agree with watch the slide theory is more reasonable but my logic is that it may have some issues with the inbetween creatures.

 

Anyone, anyone...

 

Auggybendoggy

[Watchtower]

How about mudskippers? Little fishlike creatures that are growing legs and coming out of the water for extended periods of time. Here is a "family tree" of sorts. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~thebobo/species.htm

Different species. Just one example of an "intermediate" creature. How bout the fact that birds have scales? Possibly more reptilian-like at some point? Take a look at the evolution of Man. http://hannover.park.org/Canada/Museum/man/evnman.html This page depicts various stages of human evolution. Fossils cannot be refuted. Noone in their right mind is claiming they are fakes and there is obviously a progression here. Take a look?

[Watchtower]

And to sort of answer a question u posed. Man did not descend from a lizard so to say, so there are no "Man-Lizards" persay. Same with the other species.. The have families and direct order. This basically means you have fish that might not looks as much like fish as others but they are still fish. You have primates(us) that look like things you recognize and alot of "in-between" species(neanderthal, cro-magnon, peking man, java man, apes, orangutans etc". Make sense?

[Crowbar]

humans are genetically more similar to chickens then to apes.

[Watchtower]

[Playaa]

seriously crow?

 

like I said before Watch....check out some in depth information on how a DNA molecule works...it might blow your mind.

to put it VERY simply 1 DNA molecule is more complex than any factory known to man and works seemlessly and perfectly 100% of the time.

 

another interesting note: (I think I've said this in a past thread)

a protazoan's flagellum (the tail that makes it move) is as complex as an outboard motor and requires over 40 different parts build from protiens......of those 40+ parts if any single one of them is not there at any time, the flagellum cannot and will not work. What that means is in order for evolution to have worked with a protazoan all 40 of those pieces had to spontaneously come into existance at the exact same stage of evolution.....but evolution says that would not have happened. The pieces would have slowly evolved 1 by 1 until the entire thing was built....that's how evolution works...trial and error sorta.....but if that actually happened and say 14 of those parts were put together by evolution....it would have looked at the final product and said "well this doesn't work...it's gotta go" and the flagellum would have evolved away (kinda like our "tail" as evolution says).

that's just one thing evolution can't even begin to account for....whereas the idea of a Creator....well heck that's easy....he just said "poof" and it was.

 

*edit*

for anyone that doesn't know a Protazoan is a single celled creature that lives in goo.....

Edited September 28, 2003 by Playaa/Pselus

[Watchtower]

Yeah no doubt. I'm not dispelling the notion of a creator. Or perhaps one day in time, some cosmic particle carried in on a meteorite landed and gave birth(insects, who knows what) The possibilities are endless I know.. And I usually don't take the easy route Maybe we're from another galaxy far far away!

[auggybendoggy]

In defense of watch,

I can say I am not so sure I believe everything is literal in the bible. for instance the 7 day creation. I've heard theo. argue that it may have been 7 days with thousands of years between each literal day. I think Watch is pointing to theisitic evolution. Again watch,

these things dampen my faith of how or what to believe in the bible. Did a snake really talk to a woman? I think the mans name was Karl Bart in Germany who said the scriptures are not to be taken scientific but rather as truth.

 

For instance I believe there is a passage where it says the sun stopped. Did the sun really stop. It's not even going to my knowledge the earth is. Perhaps I read it wrong. Or the mustard seed is the smallest of seeds? is it? Does this nullify his point it he got it wrong?

Did Jesus know everything? According to Acts 1 he doesnt. I think one thing I'm appreciating more is his humanity. I'm thinking of renting the last temptation of Christ. I think it deals with him being tempted beyond what scripture details. I remember many said "blasphemy"...but these same people just buy into pre-trib arguments like its going outta style.

 

I say LOVE and keep your mind open to God's possibilties. I don't think theres danger in asking if God uses evolution.

 

Late,

 

Auggy

[Playaa]

I don't think it's "dangerous" either....I just flat out think it's a silly idea........

 

as for the not 7 days of creation....why is it so hard to believe that an all powerful being who can create the universe could possibly do it in 7 days? I mean as long as you believe in that being how can you say "well there's NO WAY it could have been done that fast.....it's not like he's all powerful or anything"

and did Jesus say the Mustard seed was the smallest? I don't remember really I thought he just said "Faith the size of a mustard seed" which is pretty freakin small.

[White Knight]

This discussion is so interesting...

 

This discussion almost brings to mind the question:

 

What is the difference between Fact and Truth?

 

to put it VERY simply 1 DNA molecule is more complex than any factory known to man and works seemlessly and perfectly 100% of the time.

This is incorrect...hence mutation, cancer, et all.

 

Another point to the discussion. No (credible) scientist has ever said Evolution without putting the words "Theory of" in front of it. Though people like to overgeneralize it, and treat it as fact (or truth...) it is only a Theory. That gives it more weight than the Hypothesis but less than the Law.

 

Another useful point is that Darwin never generalized the theory of Evolution to encompass Speciation. He only used it to describe the Adaptation capabilities inside a species (Survival of the Fittest). He does not use it to state that we are related to Monkey.

 

As for my opinion on Evolution? I pretty much agree with Darwin. Evolution w/in a species yes (how else do you explain 10 foot tall basketball players), we used to fish, no.