Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[8enotto]

Rusty, an honest question.

If all gods were proven to be human constructs of the unknown of all of human history. And all religions thus void, would that scare you deep inside?
All this time it was you , your decisions and actions that defined your life experiences.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

He also seems to have missed the most obvious answer to the "sun on the 4th day," conundrum:

Gen. 1:3-5 (NIV) "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light 'day,' and the darkness he called 'night.' And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."

The text makes a distinction between night and day in order to demarcate the creative periods, but there's no reference to the then-uncreated sun or any other means of determining the length of these periods. If @Darat hadn't already brought up the two incompatible accounts of creation, I would have. I read the inclusion of two factually incompatible accounts as an instruction not to take the story literally. I don't see any reason in the text to believe that the creative periods were literal 24-hour days, and no basis yet in the emerging creation for timekeeping beyond the demarcation.

Poor old god had a slight problem. Shortly after creating stuff and "seeing it was good" It all went tits up thanks to we humans and he had to start all over again. After two tries it get it right, there still seem to be a few problems remaining.

 

[Darat]

Poor old god had a slight problem. Shortly after creating stuff and "seeing it was good" It all went tits up thanks to we humans and he had to start all over again. After two tries it get it right, there still seem to be a few problems remaining.

You need Heaven’s IT guy:

 

[Olmstead]

With no God, who gives a rip where we came from?

But with God, there's a point?

Think really hard about this one.

 

[JayUtah]

The monkeys? Well, we are all family!

Dunno, I wish they had been more evolved.

I think he's talking about 'The Big Bang', or the period of rapid expansion at the beginning of the universe.

Okay, that makes more sense.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Yes, I suppose it's one or the other but not both.
Life with God, or life without God.
With no God, who gives a rip where we came from?

Not me. Why does anyone care? Can we vote on this?

 

[JayUtah]

With no God, who gives a rip where we came from?

It may interest you to know that some people are genuinely curious about the world around them.

Is your evolution not big enough to include God?

Evolution is just as big as it needs to be. Parsimony is a big part of scientific thought. You don't propose causes and effects that you don't need.

What would happen if those who gave us evolution checked their work against the Bible first?

That presumes the Bible has some sort of authority over people who don't believe in it.

That something I wondered about. What keeps the sun burning? Thanks.

Nuclear fusion.

No. I comprehend quite easily a God that created the universe we live in.

It's not comprehension, it's invention. You invented a God that happens to coincide with things you've believed testimonially before reason entered the picture. And you just ignore everything that doesn't fit that invention. On any other subject that behavior would be considered a dangerous delusion.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Dunno, I wish they had been more evolved.

Okay, that makes more sense.

Did you mean The Monkees? I rather liked their hair cuts.

 

[JayUtah]

Did you mean The Monkees? I rather liked their hair cuts.

My mom didn't let me watch them.

 

[Steve]

My mom didn't let me watch them.

But reruns, surely?

 

[Orphia Nay]

I know Christians who believe in Science and Evolution.

They just believe God Did Evolution.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

But reruns, surely?

She doesn't let him watch those, either.

 

[Steve]

I know Christians who believe in Science and Evolution.

They just believe God Did Evolution.

Yup, that is quite common AIUI. Nice that they are on the right track.

 

[theprestige]

My experience is that a certain amount of reconciliation is possible, but ultimately the two narratives cannot be made one.

Either you reach a point where you are content to accept the patchwork of rationalization you've worked out so far, stop trying to improve on it, and try to avoid conversations that get into it.

Or you face up to the fact that one of the two narratives has to be discarded. I suspect @Rusty Tyler is speed running option two.

 

[JayUtah]

I know Christians who believe in Science and Evolution.

They just believe God Did Evolution.

It's really only the American Fundamentalists who have a problem with evolution and modern cosmology, and this all stems from their overly literal reading of the Bible.

Catholic doctrine explicitly says that God is silent on the means of creation, so whatever we're likely to observe is simply taken as how it looks like God did it. Mormons, on the other hand, issue no doctrinal statements on cosmology or evolution. This loophole allows Mormons to believe whatever science they want without risking heresy. Not surprisingly this makes one of the few things on which Mormons and Catholics agree.

Mormons don't believe in creation ex nihilo, though. In Mormonism, matter and space always existed—no Big Bang, per se. The gods just know how to "organize" it, by which I've inferred that they created what we call the laws of nature.

I'm always amused to see Fundamentalists poo-pooing the Big Bang. It was proposed by a guy who was both a scientist and a priest and who argued that science was for understanding the universe and religion was for saving your soul. Despite that, the Big Bang is Catholic imprimatur for the visible mechanism of God's initial creative act. Fundamentalists are just like, "Yikes! Explosion! Scary! Destruction! Universe go boom!" It's one step away from burning witches.

 

[JayUtah]

Either you reach a point where you are content to accept the patchwork of rationalization you've worked out so far, stop trying to improve on it, and try to avoid conversations that get into it.

I tend to side with Lemaître: stop looking for God through your telescope, microscope, and oscilloscope. The most important things a holy writ can teach its adherents is how properly to behave toward one another. If this is tied up in how they're supposed to behave toward a god then I guess that's how you explain it. I don't need it, but I don't stop others from needing it. Does a person's salvation really depend so much on believing all the meticulous stage directions in the narrative?

Or you face up to the fact that one of the two narratives has to be discarded. I suspect @Rusty Tyler is speed running option two.

He is. He's pinging the science only to see if he can find some better way of attacking it. To Fundamentalists, religion is a bludgeon with which to bash nonbelievers on the head.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I first read that as " ..walk on the plank,"

If only.

Something out of "Hornario Harplayer"?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Not if you value truth and honesty.

What is your view of Theistic Evolution?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

How have you got on with the theology I linked to, has that not provided a Christian way of accepting evolution and reconciling that with a Christian faith?

I read the white paper from the Orthodox Church. I was very good actually. Thanks.

I need to know more about Theistic Evolution.

 

[JayUtah]

What is your view of Theistic Evolution?

My personal view is that it's unnecessary. But that's because it attempts to reconcile religious truth claims with scientific theory, and that's not something I need to do. I'm satisfied with evolution as it stands. But for people who want that reconciliation, I think it's valuable. It provides a both an intellectual safe space and a religious safe space for resolving disagreement.