Why (or why not) be Christian?

[Mustardseed86]

Continuing the "Will you make it to heaven?" threads started by @VincitVeritas which have become a more wide-ranging discussion about matters of faith, Christian belief.

Hope to see you on here when the last thread runs out of space! And new posters welcome too.

We've recently been discussing the evidence for God, the soul and life after death, and debating what constitutes reliable evidence in this context.

Also some talk about whether it's accurate to say humans are 'sinful' and why/why not, some discussion of Paul and the validity of his writings and status as an apostle, how the Bible was formed (and why other writings didn't make the canon) the basis of morality/ethics, whether Jesus's message was intended for an excusively Jewish audience, the meaning of Christ (or Messiah), church tradition and different denominations, end times and probably more I've forgotten!

Regarding evidence for God it is only ever going to be experiential and require faith. Simply because God is Spirit, He is doesn't exist in material form apart from when He came to live amongst us as Jesus...and then the God part of Jesus was Spirit and the material part a human being. As soon as Spirit manifests then it is physical but then people can just assume that physical form is the same as other material forms and subject to the same laws. Unless something which is miraculous happens but even then a spontaneous physical event can just be assumed to be a spontaneous event with a physical explanation. It's difficult to prove the spiritual as it does exist in the classical sense.

I think this is true, we can only ever go by experiential evidence (personal or from other people). I do think the sheer quantity of anecdotal accounts of spiritual experiences is enough to strongly suggest that the spiritual dimension is a reality though. Dismissing it wholesale is taking skepticism to a whole new level IMO.

I disagree. People can be very convinced, and indeed very convincing, about things they have a strong vested interest in believing. Given that human beings have been claiming the existence of deities (who have come and gone) and spiritual dimensions pretty much since the dawn of time and yet every single one of those billions of people has failed to come up with the tiniest shred of actual evidence for any of it, I wouldn't call non-believers sceptical at all.

@AllProperTeaIsTheft

Given that human beings have been claiming the existence of deities (who have come and gone) and spiritual dimensions pretty much since the dawn of time and yet every single one of those billions of people has failed to come up with the tiniest shred of actual evidence for any of it, I wouldn't call non-believers sceptical at all.

You see I would think maybe they were onto something that we simply don't understand.

This.

And also begs the question again of what you would count as evidence. You say there isn't a single shred of it, but multiple people having experiences that have a remarkable amount in common is evidence in itself. You can also look at miraculous events - can you really say that there isn't a shred of evidence for any of these? To me that sounds more like confirmation bias from someone who discounts them as possibility from the start, rather than a thoughtful examination of any of these claims.

If you're interested, maybe you could challenge yourself to find out if there are in fact any well attested, inexplicable events or phenomena that point towards the supernatural. And if you're not motivated to do that, which is fair enough, why not simply say you don't know?

Given the number of different religions in the world, it is a challenge to know which one is correct. They can't all be correct, so at least one must be untrue?

Also, if one or more gods did exist, then my question is: Who or what created that god?

Yes, it makes sense that there's either one religion which is right and the rest are not, or alternatively none of them are correct. Assuming we're talking objective fact rather than the "Your truth, my truth" philosophy. It's definitely a challenge because there can be so much conflicting information to sift through.

One way of looking at it is that all the major religions actually have a lot in common. I'm not an expert, especially when it comes to Eastern religious traditions, but broadly speaking it looks to me as if every religion is seeking the truth and the commonalities suggest there is something objective which they are exploring.

As for who created God, it makes sense to me that He would be uncreated and eternal. So in other words God is the source of everything material, and as the Creator He exists outside of that paradigm. I do think it's beyond human understanding though.

Absolutely- I think some people understandably have difficulty grasping this point post Age of Enlightenment. It requires a mind shift some are unable or unwilling to make.

I think your question needs breaking down somewhat.

firstly you need to draw a distinction between Religion and God

You need to define what you mean by God

Regarding truth, one must define truth and then decide what you are wanting to find out is true or not. Every last detail of a story taken literally, an esoteric or symbolic interpretation or an underlying theme. The popularity of perennial philosophy would indicate all religions can be true.

Re who made God. Well again you have to define who God is. The best analysis
of the creation of God I think is found in Kabbalah

This might help explain re where god comes from

What miraculous events are you referring to?

Completely agree with this!

I am not religious and I don’t believe in a god because I believe in science and facts that are proven by evidence not anecdote. There is no proof of a deity other than what people have written in books and I can’t help but feel like there are less than genuine motives behind a lot of it. A friend of mine described very strongly her encounter with Jesus whilst at a Christian youth camp which to me sounded like physical and emotional manipulation by the people running the camp. She was adamant it had happened though so I respected her belief… until about a year later when she completely rejected religion. It’s personal so I have never asked her what changed but I can only assume that the beliefs she had been taught didn’t make sense to her anymore.

Whilst I’m not anti-religion, it has led to so many of the world’s problems because people with a specific religion can’t accept those with no/a different belief. Personally, I am of the opinion that you can believe in whatever you want as long as you aren’t harming other people or ramming it down my throat.

There is no proof of a deity other than what people have written in books

The Bible was written at a time when there was very little scientific understanding. This was the time when people still believed that disease was caused by evil spirits and such. People needed a reason for things they didn’t understand.

We've learned so much more about the evolution of life and the Universe since then.

Hmm... I agree, these group things can be very manipulative. Were they quite extreme in their views? I wonder if that put your friend off. It sounds as if you don't know exactly what the experience was or what caused her to reassess?

But still, they would have known that someone suddenly being able to walk, or see, or otherwise being spontaneously healed of debilitating long-term issues was not the norm.

She was a Baptist and I know the camp was more cult like. However, her family never came across as extreme in their views. When she stopped believing, we asked her but she became a bit closed off about it. She’d been quite open about her religion and told me I needed to own and read the bible. I can only assume she was a bit embarrassed to do such a u turn so I didn’t pry. We’ve pretty much lost contact with each other now so I can’t ask.

None of those things happen now anymore than they did when the Bible was purportedly written.

I am often perplexed by claims of “I believe in science do don’t believe in God” claims. I find such claims utterly bizarre. I think they reveal a lack of understanding of both science and spirituality.

Science an spirituality are both frameworks through which we view the world. Sometimes one perspective is more valid at for understanding something than another. But this doesn’t invalidate that way of looking at the world.

if we are truly understand our existence we need to stop this separation, reunite Los and Urizen, move beyond Newtons Sleep into a four fold vision, move through the 4 worlds of Kabbalah, move between heaven and hell and earth. Navigate this Divine Comedy.

The universe is neither wholly scientific nor artistic nor poetic- it stands as the harmonising factor of the separation we create.

sometimes the scientists will have the answer, sometimes we need to look to the ports and philosophers. We need to learn when to look in the right places rather than clinging to where we feel safe.

if we are truly understand our existence we need to stop this separation, reunite Los and Urizen, move beyond Newtons Sleep into a four fold vision, move through the 4 worlds of Kabbalah, move between heaven and hell and earth. Navigate this Divine Comedy.

Crikey!

But still, they would have known that someone suddenly being able to walk, or see, or otherwise being spontaneously healed of debilitating long-term issues was not the norm

I also have to wonder why these 'miracles' have not happened since?

Also, why should we believe these stories to be true? Genuine question!

We need to learn when to look in the right places rather than clinging to where we feel safe.

Yes, we need to be open minded and curious, absolutely. We've come a long way since the Bronze Age and have learned so much already about the evolution and our universe.

I feel some people still do cling to religion to feel safe.

They haven’t happened in the past either

@Lalupalina @Parker231

I believe it's a misconception that these things don't happen anymore. They do. But as PPs have said, the nature of prayer and miraculous healing (for example) don't lend themselves to our usual scientific research methods. So the question is do you give any credence to people who speak about their own experiences? I certainly don't dismiss them, although I think it's important to be discerning because unfortunately not everyone is genuine. That doesn't mean nobody is - that seems like a fallacy to me.

I would recommend this study as an interesting starting point:

https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/healing-after-prayer-an-interdisciplinary-case-study

Lalupalina Often miracles happen in places where Christianity is only recently spreading, this is also what happened in the New Testament. They are given as signs to help people come to faith.

So fitting I've come across this now.
Will try and make my entry short -

I got baptised on New Years Eve. Since last February I've been on this journey to know God. I've downloaded Bible in One Year. I've even bought Christianity For Dummies. I have given my life to Christ yet I still have a lot of questions that I feel I can't ask my church group because they might think I'm weird.
They say God loves us but how do they know?
My 12 year old asked me "if God created us then who created God?" I couldn't even answer him. Maybe these are basic questions so sorry if they are.

I've prayed for things and they have been answered but again is that God or just because
When I ask people at my church they just say "believe! Have faith"
And also sometimes I feel uncomfortable when the church keep wanting me to bring people from work like I need to recruit people. I started this journey because I wanted to not because someone dragged me from work. I don't like the side of it where I need to "bring people to church"

Anyway sorry for ranting but I'm so glad I came across this post. Some of the other PP have raised more questions in me

Maybe it’s just an adjustment of perspective as to whether they happened or not. The bible isn’t meant to be read literally (well in my view)