Why Christianity? discussion

11 views
Minor topics > Truth?

Comments Showing 1-21 of 21 (21 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments One cannot be seriously searching for Truth when they declare everything in the Judeochristian experience true and everything in every other religion and science false.


message 2: by David (new)

David Pulliam | 42 comments No one does that since Christianity overlaps with other religions.


message 3: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
EVERYTHING is a lazy word. Nothing is that simple.


message 4: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
Robert, you post all of these challenges- do you ever learn anything? (Honestly, I seldom learn anything in chat groups. But I never stop learning from other sources.)


message 5: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Rod - of course I don't learn anything from these mindless true believers, I'm only here to exhibit the Socratic Method and have a little fun at everybody else's expense.


message 6: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
Hmmm.


message 7: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
Why do you assume these people are mindless? You haven't fairly presented your case yet.

If anything, your brand of Christianity seems to be mostly emotional. Which is okay--- but doesn't qualify you to adequately label other scholars as mindless.

I wouldn't dare call anyone in this group mindless. We come here because these are issues we think deeply about. At onetime I thought maybe you did too.


message 8: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Rod - You wouldn't understand my case if I presented it. it would involve molecular biology where terms are specialized and direct, and only understood by those in that educational field. The Arts are vague and nebulous so everyone dances around thinking they are communicating with one another when they're actually engaged in obfuscation. You have said yourself the Bible takes endless study to supposedly unlock some meaning. I'd say that's correct but your path is circular, with ideas going out of vogue and then making a resurgence. Theology never actually advances. So, I think about the Universe, where one advance leads to another and we move forward. Sorry, buddy, religion is moribund, barely worth thinking about, and only good for one's salvation.


message 9: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
I'm shocked you didn't bother to find God's truth specialized and direct.


message 10: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments No Rod - He doesn't speak directly to me (does he to you?) I pray and some seem to be answered although it could just be random activity; most are ignored or filed away. I'll just take my salvation as enough and wait for an idyllic afterlife!


message 11: by Chad (new)

Chad (chadjohnson) | 63 comments Robert, I thought the other Robert was likely the most conceited person on these boards... but I'm not so sure anymore.

Pride comes before the fall my friend.

To assume that the rest of us are just to stupid to understand your beliefs is assuming that you are somehow better than the the rest of us.

I have 3 masters degrees and an undergraduate degree in engineering... why do you just assume I'm dumb?


message 12: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
God only speaks to me through His Word. Written word.

Anything else could be my delusions and desires. Not to be trusted fully.


message 13: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Chad - congratulations on your educational achievement - that's quite a resume! I associate with some of the smartest biochemists and geneticists around yet, given ample evidence in their own fields that there IS a supreme Creator, they won't even discuss the possibility. Are they dumb? Certainly not. Blind? No, they are constantly on the cutting edge of their field. It is hard to get a straight answer from them, but I think the simplest explanation is peer pressure. Even though they may have doubts about a secular Universe, they are afraid to express them. So, transferring this to how I regard your posts - I feel you are amply intelligent but afraid to anger God. Your religious biases are roughly analogous to the scientist's ones - there are allowable talking points that push the envelope but are still within the bounds of what your peer group deems permissible to your God. Go beyond the boundary line and you become the Catholic's equivalent of excommunicated. I'm bounded only by a search for truth - employing all disciplines. That freedom is eminently rewarding and I'm still in good stead with my Lord.


message 14: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
How do you know you're in good stead with your Lord?

If it wasn't for God's Complete Word- I wouldn't have a clue about any Steads.


message 15: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Rod - all it takes is the Gospels for me to know. OT stuff for Hebrews just confuses the matter.


message 16: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
Actually it clarifies the Gospels and gives them historic validation and context. Otherwise we just got 4 random fan fictions from the late 1st century.


message 17: by Rod (new)

Rod Horncastle | 469 comments Mod
I agree that the Gospels are a great place to start. As would Mormons and J.W.'s, and every new age believer I know. Even Muslims applaud their own interpretation of the Gospels


message 18: by Cherie (new)

Cherie | 18 comments Robert what did you read in the OT that made you decide not to believe it? Do you think believing in the OT is wrong? I just joined this group today so I don't know the background of your (potentially?) previously stated beliefs.


message 19: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Rod - if one can misinterpret NT, what would keep that individual from doing the same with OT?


message 20: by Robert (new)

Robert Core | 303 comments Cherie - I believe probably 90% of OT. As Rod points out, the central tenets are a necessity for giving context to the NT. I can understand why the Hebrews constantly feared the Wrath of God. The Laws were nice in theory, but impossible in practice. For Believers in Christ, the Laws are inviolate, his Grace his assured, and the Wrath of God is no longer applicable. Why would anyone avail themselves to the "stone them" mentality of the OT unless they're into self-flagellation. As for my background, I'm a scientist so given over to skepticism anyway. Jump in there and make you feelings known, Cherie, no one shrinks from controversy on this board!


message 21: by Cherie (new)

Cherie | 18 comments I don't think anyone who believes the NT, (which would mean believing when Jesus said the old law was gone, and we have a new law, i.e. Love God and love your neighbor) (and besides that, that to "come to the father" aka heaven you must believe in Christ, who died to save your sins), I don't think anyone who reads that, and believes it, would then go to the OT and say, "Ope, well it says here if I don't wash my hands such and such times after handling raw meat I should be stoned, so I guess I better go stone myself cause last time I had a rare steak I didn't wash my hands first, wow ppl who believe the OT are so dumb" unless they were being needlessly dense or purposely smug.

Because if you do believe what the NT says, then you can go back to the OT and instead say "wow! Look at all these rules ppl used to have to follow to be all right with God! Aren't I SO BLESSED that I live in the 21st century and can talk to God whenever I want to, and don't have to follow all these rules and regulations?" I think a persons attitude when reading the OT would be one of humble gratitude, not facetious mockery.


back to top