Getting back to "who is Jesus"? Jesus was a man that was of God. He lived on this earth and experienced all the temptations you and I have on a daily basis. Instead of giving into his flesh; he chose to live a sin free life; knowing that one day everyone close to him and all the people he is working for will spit on him and renounce him to save their flesh. He spread a teaching that the old laws of the world are those that will bring failure. That people living by law will never be able to live or feel peace. That through him; all will be just as perfect as him if they just accept him. No matter who you are, what terrible things you've done, what terrible things you will do; you will be forgiven. Your life now has purpose and your focus isn't on the negativity of the world but of the spreading of mercy, grace, love, compassion, and purpose. That we all can keep our head up high because now we are of Christ. That a man that did no wrong was accused of wrong. That a man that had to power to move mountains, allowed the weak to torture him, mock him and kill him for the greater good of mankind. (Reminds me of the scene in "man of steel" where they handcuff him and he walks with them). But the greatest thing about Jesus Christ is knowing that I was on his mind when he was on that cross. That he knew about the good in us. That he has hope for mankind. That we are perfect in his eyes.
Wow that seems like a promising life! Good for you. So you are like a crab that moves side to side but never forward? Then if you meet up with God, you can be the man that says "God I hid my talent because I know what you truly expect of me. I gave your talent back because I don't want to be accountable for that you wanted from me"
I'm not being presumptuous in the least. If, in the unlikely future you pose scientists are able to create universes and life in their labs, it still wouldn't change the fact that for the lifeforms living inside these new universes it would be unknowable and untestable as to what outside factors caused their new universe to exist and resulted in the creation of life within it. And exactly how does the "God of the gaps" issue differ from the "science of the gaps" issue? We don't know something now, but we may know it in the future is not exactly an argument from logic. Saying that "lack of knowledge does not validate and shouldn't be used to enable theism" is no more valid than saying "lack of knowledge does not validate and shouldn't be used to enable atheism." My decision to believe that there is a creator is based upon a lot of factors. I think that there is simply too much order to the universe to deny that it is designed. I think that the amount of basic information required for life to come into existance points to an intelligent designer. I fully admit that a decision regarding these matters is ultimately based upon what we call faith. I don't see that the atheist point of view on these topics is anything other than that either.
Christians are people and people by nature are messed up. Churches foul things up constantly. I don't disagree with you that many Christians can come across as judgemental and off-putting to those who don't believe as they do. What I am saying is that is NOT what Jesus was about. He chose to live among and interact with the outcasts of Jewish society...prostitutes, tax collectors, the poor, gentiles (people from non-Jewish backgrounds). He told his followers that they should be very careful not to judge others lest they in turn face judgement for their sins. I believe that there are a whole lot of Christians who are going to have a seriously uncomfortable time when they come face to face with Jesus after their deaths. I believe that the Bible is the word of God and that it exists in the form it does for His purposes. I also believe that our understanding of those purposes is and what exactly is being said is full of human error. What parts of the Bible are meant to be historical and what parts are meant to be more allegorical or poetic? What points that are made are true for the specific time and circumstances being presented and which are true more generally and meant to be applied to all people? These issues are something that people of faith look at and discuss all the time. Some Christians have looked at the geneologies presented in the Bible and have determined that the age of the earth is only a few thousand years. But, were those passages intended to be a literal timeline of history or were they intended, as I believe, to be more of a general statement establishing Christ in the history of Israel and showing his royal lineage, but not literally showing every generation since the dawn of time? When Genesis uses the term "days" to describe the periods of God's creation, is it meant to be literally earth days or were they simply 7 slices of a vision that God gave to Moses or whoever actually wrote the book of Genesis? The opinions that you hear some Christians give on these points and the age of the universe and Earth are not articles of faith. I didn't sign on as a Christian to accept a level of understanding of the cosmos as it was viewed several thousand years ago. Scientific knowledge shows that early understandings of what the Bible was saying were flawed. That doesn't mean that the basic message of Genesis, that God created the universe and man, that he wants to have a relationship with us, etc. is flawed. Your question about the impact of earlier pagan religions on the validity of Jesus is an interesting one. I'll admit that I haven't studied this issue. I do know that it has been raised by those seeking to discredit Jesus as nothing more than a knockoff of those earlier pagan religions. I suspect that they overstate their case, but let's assume that they're correct and that most of the stories about Jesus's miracles have similar elements to things found in stories of pagan gods. Jesus, living in the time he did, would certainly have knowledge of the pagan religions of his day. It seems likely to me that he might choose to do similar miracles for the purpose of showing that he actually was God living in human form. Your pagan god is said to have walked on water? Here's how it's actually done.
but in that case we would know god is not required, nor even a likely reason for our particular universe or life on earth to exist. I don't know what your definition of atheism is, but lack of knowledge enables agnosticism by definition. I'm agnostic concerning origins. Mags would not have noticed because he's too caught up pigeonholing me, but I never "deny" that the universe was designed. It may be true. Again though, it reduces to a gap argument because we don't have the information necessary to determine what the universe is capable of naturally. There may be other natural god-free reasons for the order we see. Evolution has taught us that much. it doesn't require faith to not believe in something.
Exactly!!!! If people actually paid attention to the stories of when Christ lived on this planet; they would know the "judgmental portion" was hardly the case. I would guess that 99% of his preaching was about grace, love and forgiveness. Accepting the beauty of humanity and why God loves us. So well said! Good for you! repp'd LOL! Nice way of interpreting it! But most of those pagan similarities were amended after Christianity became wide spread. Those God's existed before Christ, but the stories of "walking on water, virgin birth, etc" all came after Christianity was relevant.
You may see it as "pigeon holing" i see it as knowing your arguments for well over a couple years. You say the same thing, then when it becomes too hard to explain; you go agnostic and play the "science of the gaps" card. If you don't know and advertise you live without faith; then stop trying to explain things, using scientific philosophy as a reference. That is no better than one with Christian faith, using verses in the Bible to support their belief.
That's actually a pretty good answer, it allows for your faith and facts to coexist. Not my bag of tea, but I get it. A separate question since we are somehow able to discuss instead of argue, Do you ever contemplate why atheists don't believe, I mean try and put yourself in our frame of mind? really try and understand what not believing without evidence is all about. I know I try and see the issues from a believers viewpoint. That doesn't mean I succeed, but I do attempt to understand the underpinnings of why theists view the world as they do. Especially more devout theists, it's very interesting to me how someone can walk that line.
I know the question is directed towards e_blazer; but I was once a big time agnostic from 12-16; since I don't believe atheism actually a sound ideology. I would make jokes to my dad about how stupid believing in God was, etc. I believe I have a good framework in the mindset of those that want proof. The funny thing is how the proof presented itself to me. Okay so here is my turn around; in case you wanted to read it... It wasn't by force, but by love. The more I would try and piss those off, they would shower me with more love. I was getting confused and finally made the leap to go to church to see what the fuss was about. I was gothic back then and I always came to church dressed all in black, wearing make-up and painted nails. My hair was sticking straight up like Robert Smith, from the cure. I remembered what I felt back then. I wanted to expose the judgmental church and if they asked me to leave, it would give validity on what I was feeling all along. Instead they welcomed me and always gave me hugs. Said I looked unusual to them, but didn't look anything different in God's eyes. Anyway, I felt a great pushing in my soul and during one invitation, I went forward and accepted Christ. Best decision I made!
Given that I started out in my college years having the viewpoint that I was either an atheist or agnostic, yeah, I can certainly relate to your viewpoint. I think my change of view began when I came to accept that there are limits to what is knowable from a scientific standpoint. How could I demand scientific proof of God's role as creator of the universe when I came to the understanding that science can only test what exists within the realm of our physical reality? Where did I see in nature any evidence that something as intricate as life, even in the simplest forms, could generate spontaneously from inanimate materials? At the time when I was having these thoughts, I came into contact with some really wonderful people who shared their faith in Christ with me. To me it resonated as believable and true. I've read that some biologists have found evidence that some of us have a genetic predisposition towards religious belief. Perhaps that's true. I only know that for me my faith is a basic part of who I am as an individual. It gives me a foundation and a purpose. I don't expect that everyone will agree with the decisions that have led me and others like me to where I am, and I try to be respectful of where they are on their own journey. I think that we can agree that the world would be a much better place if everyone took a similar stance.
the god you are proposing would have to be way (infinitely?) more complex than the simplest forms of life. in terms of probability how is postulating such a god a simpler, more likely solution to the origin of life than some sort of bootstrap self-organizing mechanism? if you think life on its own is improbable for reasons of complexity, doesn't adding god just add a whole new layer of improbability for the same reasons? this is something that's obvious to non-believers than theists tend to trivialize.
Actually no since one that believes in God would agree that he was already here in all it's complexity. The faith that is the driving force of creation. When someone with that complexity designs life; it's pretty simple. As simple as a biologist growing bacteria culture because they know how.
Not even close to a double standard because a theist believes in things existing outside this natural world. The agnostic doesn't because they put their belief on the observable.
It's a good question, but one that's totally unanswerable. The Bible says that God is eternal and has always existed. And, yes, it says that he's infinitely more complex than any lifeform that we know. I know you don't like that answer and I understand why. I don't see how atheism or agnosticism have any better answers. All they say is that one can only believe in what can be seen and tested scientifically. When you reach the great untestable barriers of the origins of our universe and life, ultimately you either have to say, okay, there's something greater going on here than I can understand, and I accept it, or, nope, I simply can't believe in something I can't test.
My development. I don't think I was ever a believer even though I grew up in a Jewish household and went to synagogue weekly. When I was in Kindergarten (I don't recall this, but my parents do) the class was discussing Jesus and I was singled out as going to hell because I didn't believe. A couple years later, I remember very well, some kids in the neighborhood came to calling me Efry (my name is Eli) because I was going to fry in the afterlife. I did not believe in any religion, but at least I was loved fully by my family, so I never felt out of place, even though I had a purple afro and other freakish traits like Mags. There is a great picture of my Grandma and me on the beach, happy and laughing when I was a teenager, my hair was 18inches high at the time. It's pretty funny next to an elderly Jew. But as it turns out, my parents don't really believe to much either. My mom tries, but my Dad just goes through the routine because he loves his heritage and wants to be respectful of all those who came before him. But he has told me he really doesn't believe in god or even care much if there is a god. My mom I don't think truly believes, but she acts as if she does. The vast majority of those whom I came in contact with growing up who were devout Christians treated me with disdain and were often outright mean. I have a very poor view of devout Christians. It's nice to know, now that I am older, that some Christians are non-judgmental, but in my formation they all seemed to be quite ready and willing to judge. Up until recently, I never spoke about my beliefs, I just didn't believe and that was that. I am not as well versed as many atheists in the reasons or arguments for and against atheism, I did not read about it, talk about it, or do anything to learn about it. I just personally saw that too much evil was done in the world in the name of some religion, I didn't want to ever be one of "those people". I have a very strong sense of right and wrong, I don't have a need or want for anything to guide those personal ethics.
That's really unfortunate GOD. I'm sorry your experience with Christianity was of the hell fire and brimstone kind. It really isn't like that. I know those types and despise what they stand for. That isn't Christianity; that's being a Pharisee. When they meet God; I expect many Christians will be ashamed for misleading people like that.
