Hello

[ExChristian]

Although we allow non-Christians to be members if they are willing to follow the rules, we are primarily a Christian forum.

Yeah the rules are pretty clear on it and I understand. I think this thread gives you a general idea of what I'm about and if it's not for you guys no problem. But so far this thread has been interesting enough for me and hope you too.

 

[Obadiah]

I do have a sense that "i've seen and heard it all" regarding religious belief but I do try to cultivate humbleness as my ability to understand certainly is falible. In this sense my lack of belief in a deity can be changed but it would have to be evidence based and not faith based. One thing that I always disliked about the story of doubting Thomas is that he got a bad rap for doubting. I felt affinity with him not an aversion to him.

We all have our doubts, and we all need to use faith at times where there is no scientific evidence. I can relate to Thomas perfectly, and never saw him as a bad guy, only as an example to all of us that even though we have doubts at times, God still loves us and has a good place for us if we simply ask Him to forgive our times of doubt and ask him to strengthen us from there. God cannot be proven through scientific experiments or through evidence as we humans define evidence. Yet God has proven himself to me more than once through things that have no earthly explanation, yet I will never dare to try to say were not the real power of a real God at work. But then there are times I still have my doubts in other areas of my faith. As the man in the Bible who was frustrated by this same dilema asked of Jesus: "I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief" (Mark 9:24, NIV)

 

[Obadiah]

Yeah the rules are pretty clear on it and I understand. I think this thread gives you a general idea of what I'm about and if it's not for you guys no problem. But so far this thread has been interesting enough for me and hope you too.

I appreciate your honesty an openess here, and that is why I've tried to return the same to you by not sugar coating who or what we are here. I hope you will stay around and participate where you can, despite the rules. If you think about it, it's really much like going to a church service. You can go to a church service, and you can even admit to not believing in God. No decent church is going to kick you out for that. But as I know you can imagine since you have a church background, they also wouldn't allow you to stand up and teach people that their faith is false and they should abandon it. It's much like that here. When you post something in one of our forums, it's not a private conversation, but rather it's more the equivalent of standing up and saying your piece in front of an entire church congregation. I would think as long as you keep that in mind you will be just fine here.

 

[ExChristian]

I do have a question for you guys though. Say this simple conversation occurs:
Person A: Hi, I believe in God.
Person B: Hi, I do too but ...
Person A: But what?
Person B: But I don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead or that he even existed. And certianly not Mary or a virgin birth. I don't believe in heaven or hell, sin, saints, Adam and Eve, Holy Spirit, the Ten Commandments, or that the bible is written or inspired by God.
Person A: Ummm...
Person B: But, I believe in God.

So what would you make of such "belief"? Would you feel affinity with this individual because they also believe? Would you at some point ask what God they believe in exactly? Could Person B legitimately claim they "believe in God"?

 

[Obadiah]

I do have a question for you guys though. Say this simple conversation occurs:
Person A: Hi, I believe in God.
Person B: Hi, I do too but ...
Person A: But what?
Person B: But I don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead or that he even existed. And certianly not Mary or a virgin birth. I don't believe in heaven or hell, sin, saints, Adam and Eve, Holy Spirit, the Ten Commandments, or that the bible is written or inspired by God.
Person A: Ummm...
Person B: But, I believe in God.

So what would you make of such "belief"? Would you feel affinity with this individual because they also believe? Would you at some point ask what God they believe in exactly? Could Person B legitimately claim they "believe in God"?

I'll take a stab at it.

If by "affinity" you mean do I share their beliefs, no. They do not hold the same beliefs that I hold. That doesn't mean that I can't like them as a friend or whatever, but I do not share their beliefs about God.

I might or might not ask what god they believe in. It would depend on the total context of the conversation and also how I sensed their attitude and openness to a discussion. I guess another factor would be that I may already know the answer without asking them.

In English writing, the use of a capital G in the word God always denotes the subject is the God of the Christian Bible or of the Jewish Old Testament Scriptures. A small g denotes a different god, such as perhaps Zeus or Apollo. So if by using the capital G you are referring to the God of the Bible, then no, they can not claim that they believe in God while denying the truth of the entire Christian Bible. The Bible is our only source of information and instruction from God. If we deny it's truth, we deny and do not believe in God. At least not the same God. This isn't the same as people having different interpretations of some scripture that isn't real clear to us who speak a different language than it was written in and live in a very different culture. There are certain sections of scripture that aren't completely understood, and you will see long conversations that can even get heated at times between people who have different interpretations. But there are certain parts that you can not hold to a different interpretation and still be considered a Christian or to "believe in" God. The existence of Jesus in history, His virgin birth and resurrection from the dead, heaven , sin, the Holy Spirit, and the inspiration of scripture are some of those things you can't deny and still be a Christian. People may have different interpretations of what some of those things are, such as what actions are actually sins, or what Hell actually is and who will go there, but outright denying these kind of things isn't compatible with the Christian faith.

 

[ExChristian]

Ha! The capital G thing was bugging me as that wouldn't be obvious with sound. But good clarification. The reason I ask is because I recently read a point that I thought was pretty good. That if one believes in God then it's not just one belief one accepts, it's a whole slew of beliefs. Each of which are then implicitly accepted or if questioned can cause the main belief (God) to be undermined. So what appears to be a simple question such as "Do you believe in God" can be difficult to answer with a simple yes or no for someone questioning any of the implicit beliefs.

 

[Obadiah]

Ha! The capital G thing was bugging me as that wouldn't be obvious with sound. But good clarification. The reason I ask is because I recently read a point that I thought was pretty good. That if one believes in God then it's not just one belief one accepts, it's a whole slew of beliefs. Each of which are then implicitly accepted or if questioned can cause the main belief (God) to be undermined. So what appears to be a simple question such as "Do you believe in God" can be difficult to answer with a simple yes or no for someone questioning any of the implicit beliefs.

Very true. As you know this is the source of a lot of discussions. Many people will say they believe in God, but when you pin them down on what they mean by that, they really don't believe in the God described in the Bible. Same thing with the word Christian. Many people say they are Christian, but not all understand what that really means as described in scripture. Sometimes you have to ask a lot of pointed questions to know if they really are a Christian or just think they are because they happen to go to church once a week or they happen to live in the United States, etc, etc. Then sometimes you really can't know, because some people have learned to give all the "right" answers, but they don't truly believe it.

 

[Kathi]

Very true. As you know this is the source of a lot of discussions. Many people will say they believe in God, but when you pin them down on what they mean by that, they really don't believe in the God described in the Bible. Same thing with the word Christian. Many people say they are Christian, but not all understand what that really means as described in scripture. Sometimes you have to ask a lot of pointed questions to know if they really are a Christian or just think they are because they happen to go to church once a week or they happen to live in the United States, etc, etc. Then sometimes you really can't know, because some people have learned to give all the "right" answers, but they don't truly believe it.

Yes,one of the biggest complaints among unbelievers is that they think Christians are hypocrits.That is because the unbeliever hears that person say they are a Christian and what they say and do does not go along with the Christian beliefs.

 

[Mike S]

It's the way science works. It's not a weakness of scientific inquiry to have explanations/theories that where overturned. They almost always overturned by a more in-depth understanding and what is left is an improved explanation with greater predictive power.

The computer you are using to post is only possible because individuals accepted scientific theories - and acted on them. For example, theory of electromagneticsm was needed to be accepted to progress computers. Currently, quantum theories are being utilized to make computer chips smaller and smaller and to understand the limits of what is possible. Quantum theory is on the forefront of what will be possible in future progress - such as nanotechnology.

I didn't say it was a weakness. Science HAS to adjust and modify theories as additional information becomes known. My point was just to say "theory" and "speculation" are not all that different.

 

[Mike S]

I do have a sense that "i've seen and heard it all" regarding religious belief but I do try to cultivate humbleness as my ability to understand certainly is falible. In this sense my lack of belief in a deity can be changed but it would have to be evidence based and not faith based. One thing that I always disliked about the story of doubting Thomas is that he got a bad rap for doubting. I felt affinity with him not an aversion to him.

I don't think he got a bad rap for doubting. Part of the value of this story being included in the gospels is that it's a way of demonstrating that the risen Jesus had a physical body, not a spirit or ghost body. There were early Christian sects that believed Jesus did not physically rise from the dead. Also, Thomas' doubt is similar to our own doubts, we need to experience Jesus personally for our faith to be strong.

 

[jasonc]

Thomas aka didymus died as a martyr in Syria.

 

[Obadiah]

...That if one believes in God then it's not just one belief one accepts, it's a whole slew of beliefs. Each of which are then implicitly accepted or if questioned can cause the main belief (God) to be undermined. So what appears to be a simple question such as "Do you believe in God" can be difficult to answer with a simple yes or no for someone questioning any of the implicit beliefs.

I think I didn't catch the main point of your statement before... I think I see what you mean, but would say that while there are a whole set of beliefs, not all of them are critical. It's sort of like driving a car. You pretty much have to "believe in" how to turn the steering wheel to aim it, how to push on the gas pedal to make it go, etc, etc. Those are required for being a driver. But some people can't get by without a stereo or GPS system, or many other things that another person doesn't feel they need. Those kind of things aren't required to be a driver. As with being a Christian... There are certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian, and there are other beliefs that you may or may not hold to while still being a Christian. You have to believe in Jesus is an example of a core belief. But one Christian may believe he must use one particular translation of the bible (as an example), while another may not believe it matters. One Christian may believe the second coming of Christ will be before the millennial while another believes it will happen after. Those are the kind of beliefs that you can take either side on, or just not have an opinion on at all and still be a Christian.

 

[Mike S]

I think I didn't catch the main point of your statement before... I think I see what you mean, but would say that while there are a whole set of beliefs, not all of them are critical. It's sort of like driving a car. You pretty much have to "believe in" how to turn the steering wheel to aim it, how to push on the gas pedal to make it go, etc, etc. Those are required for being a driver. But some people can't get by without a stereo or GPS system, or many other things that another person doesn't feel they need. Those kind of things aren't required to be a driver. As with being a Christian... There are certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian, and there are other beliefs that you may or may not hold to while still being a Christian. You have to believe in Jesus is an example of a core belief. But one Christian may believe he must use one particular translation of the bible (as an example), while another may not believe it matters. One Christian may believe the second coming of Christ will be before the millennial while another believes it will happen after. Those are the kind of beliefs that you can take either side on, or just not have an opinion on at all and still be a Christian.

I think C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity comes pretty close to discussing core Christian beliefs. While not complete and comprehensive, it does a good job of discussing the intersection - but not union - of various Christian traditions.

Lewis, BTW, also does a good job of discussing his journey from atheism to Christianity, being persuaded of the existence of God by an argument from morality. "conscience reveals to us a moral law whose source cannot be found in the natural world, thus pointing to a supernatural Lawgiver."

 

[ExChristian]

I didn't say it was a weakness. Science HAS to adjust and modify theories as additional information becomes known. My point was just to say "theory" and "speculation" are not all that different.

No, you didn't explicitly say it but I took it as implicit. I'm not clear on if you hold science (aka scientific method) in high or low regard. Yes, science modfies theories as additional info becomes known. Even if we say the simlarity is that both are speculation, a theory would be tested speculation. Are these words now more similar than they are different because one is tested and the other not? Couldn't we say that the testing creates such a difference that they are more different than similar?

If I wanted to take a trip into space on the Virgin Galactic as a space tourist and asked Richard Branson how can I be confident in the trip and he says "don't worry, my engineers speculate that everything will go great" - that won't give me the confidence I need. But if he says "my engineers have utilized scientific theory in our calculations and tested all our speculations" they yes, that increases confidence. Now I'll ask for the evidence of testing. This is about the value/weight we place on explantions that then lead us to make choices.

I find many religious people (in words) devalue scientific explanations but if we were to examine their lives and watch their choices - the vast majority lead their lives as if they are confident in scientific explanations. When Pope John Paul II was shot did everyone just pray over him and believe that faith will heal him? No, they got his butt to the hospital so that science and the skill of humans could save him. I use PJP2 as an example only because of all people that might be healed/saved through prayer/faith/divine intervention it seams plausible since he would have millions praying for him.

When religious people make these types of choices, for me, it implicity means that they value science vastly over prayer/faith. In the end, it is someone's choice that exposes what they value.

 

[ExChristian]

I think I didn't catch the main point of your statement before... I think I see what you mean, but would say that while there are a whole set of beliefs, not all of them are critical. It's sort of like driving a car. You pretty much have to "believe in" how to turn the steering wheel to aim it, how to push on the gas pedal to make it go, etc, etc. Those are required for being a driver. But some people can't get by without a stereo or GPS system, or many other things that another person doesn't feel they need. Those kind of things aren't required to be a driver. As with being a Christian... There are certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian, and there are other beliefs that you may or may not hold to while still being a Christian. You have to believe in Jesus is an example of a core belief. But one Christian may believe he must use one particular translation of the bible (as an example), while another may not believe it matters. One Christian may believe the second coming of Christ will be before the millennial while another believes it will happen after. Those are the kind of beliefs that you can take either side on, or just not have an opinion on at all and still be a Christian.

Thanks for the clarification. I want to focus on the "certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian". Would the bible be the only place where we find these core beliefs or do you believe there are other sources for the foundational beliefs?

 

[Kathi]

Thanks for the clarification. I want to focus on the "certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian". Would the bible be the only place where we find these core beliefs or do you believe there are other sources for the foundational beliefs?

Who do you think created the Earth?How do you think the moon,sun and stars appeared in our heavens?

 

[ExChristian]

Who do you think created the Earth?How do you think the moon,sun and stars appeared in our heavens?

Who do you think created the Earth?
I think there are two assumptions in this question that I am skeptical of. First, that it was a "who" and that the earth was "created". To use the word created I think implies strongly there is a "creator". Ray Comfort is someone who plays on this implicitness. Although I'm not totally opposed to using this word I think it's not neutral enough. I think the more appropriate term is "formed". It's more nuetral in that it can be modified either way. You could say "formed by God" or "formed by natural processes". I accept that the earth was formed by natural processes along with the rest of the solar system over millions of years (interestingly this is an area where a Theory of Solar Formation is still under development). It's a good parallel to the discussion regarding theories. There's a great page at the University of Colorado Boulder laying out what facts a Theory of Solar Formation should explain. Since we do not describe natural processes as a "who" but more of a "what" let's rephrase the question: "what formed the earth" or "how did the earth form". This is an edit due to Obadiah's criticism that I didn't answer the question. The answer would be "no one created the earth".

How do you think the moon,sun and stars appeared in our heavens?
Explanation here would be simliar to the prior question. I want to point out though that using the word "appear" I think suggests that there was a very short period of time from when these objects weren't there and now they are. In the sense that they "just appeared". But my explanation is that they formed over millions to billions of years.

With these questions there will be a regression to the limit of our scientific understanding. So next, for the sake of argument, you may say "fine, they formed over millions of years.... but where did the stuff they formed out of come from?". Ok, so eventually the end game is "where did the singularity (big bang) come from", or "why is there something and not nothing?" (more philosophical). Well, so now we get into the more speculative side of science. The limits of our understanding. But there are discussions regarding Super String Hypothesis (I don't use theory here although many do) and "what was before the big bang". It's pretty cool stuff.

 

[Obadiah]

Thanks for the clarification. I want to focus on the "certain core beliefs that you must have to be a Christian". Would the bible be the only place where we find these core beliefs or do you believe there are other sources for the foundational beliefs?

There can be other sources such as studies done by theologians, etc. But the ultimate foundation of these beliefs has to come from and be based on the Bible. One of the reasons for this is that a very basic core belief is that the scripture of the Bible was inspired by God and is His only instructions for us (in the original writings in the original languages). If this belief is rejected, then scripture becomes fallible, throwing all other Christian beliefs based on it into question.

This is not to say that every word of the Bible is literally true. Some writings are literal, yes. But for example, some are parables to illustrate a point, but may or may not be literally true. Some writings are symbolic. Some speak to a specific situation in a particular culture at a particular time and only the principle involved applies to us today, not necessarily the specifics of how it was applicable at the time of it's writing. Where many of the differences among Christians come up is in trying to decide which type of writing certain scripture passages are written in. But there are still certain things that are known to be meant as literal and are essential. Any source that states something is an essential belief to be a Christian, but can not base that belief on scripture is wrong. The belief may be a good idea, and may be worth following for other reasons, but if it or the principle behind it is not from scripture, it doesn't affect salvation therefore does not determine who is or isn't a Christian.

 

[Obadiah]

Who do you think created the Earth?
I think there are two assumptions in this question that I am skeptical of. First, that it was a "who" and that the earth was "created". To use the word created I think implies strongly there is a "creator". Ray Comfort is someone who plays on this implicitness. Although I'm not totally opposed to using this word I think it's not neutral enough. I think the more appropriate term is "formed". It's more nuetral in that it can be modified either way. You could say "formed by God" or "formed by natural processes". I accept that the earth was formed by natural processes along with the rest of the solar system over millions of years (interestingly this is an area where a Theory of Solar Formation is still under development). It's a good parallel to the discussion regarding theories. There's a great page at the University of Colorado Boulder laying out what facts a Theory of Solar Formation should explain. Since we do not describe natural processes as a "who" but more of a "what" let's rephrase the question: "what formed the earth" or "how did the earth form".

How do you think the moon,sun and stars appeared in our heavens?
Explanation here would be simliar to the prior question. I want to point out though that using the word "appear" I think suggests that there was a very short period of time from when these objects weren't there and now they are. In the sense that they "just appeared". But my explanation is that they formed over millions to billions of years.

With these questions there will be a regression to the limit of our scientific understanding. So next, for the sake of argument, you may say "fine, they formed over millions of years.... but where did the stuff they formed out of come from?". Ok, so eventually the end game is "where did the singularity (big bang) come from", or "why is there something and not nothing?" (more philosophical). Well, so now we get into the more speculative side of science. The limits of our understanding. But there are discussions regarding Super String Hypothesis (I don't use theory here although many do) and "what was before the big bang". It's pretty cool stuff.

This illustrates one of the problems I have when secular people insist that things such as the theory of evolution or the big bang theory must be true and ideas such as the Biblical creation story must be false and certainly are so foolish we just can't even appear to give them any credit at all. It's true that Christians can't prove the story of creation in Genesis to be literally true. We just don't know HOW God did it. But yet in your answer above you spent a lot of effort to discuss the semantics of words like "who" or "created", etc, but still you haven't any answer to the original question. And that's OK because just like the scriptural story of creation, science really doesn't have an answer. Only theories.

But to go back to your comments about "core beliefs", how God created the heavens and the earth and created people isn't a core belief that affects salvation.

 

[Free]

Since we do not describe natural processes as a "who" but more of a "what" let's rephrase the question: "what formed the earth" or "how did the earth form". This is an edit due to Obadiah's criticism that I didn't answer the question. The answer would be "no one created the earth".

How do you think the moon,sun and stars appeared in our heavens?
Explanation here would be simliar to the prior question. I want to point out though that using the word "appear" I think suggests that there was a very short period of time from when these objects weren't there and now they are. In the sense that they "just appeared". But my explanation is that they formed over millions to billions of years.

So if they formed over billions of years, just how did they form? Are there not certain laws which are necessary for the formation of all the planets and stars? If so, where did the laws come from?