Figuring Out Religion

[Tortoise]

I guess this is the whole debate of saved by faith alone or by works?  My take is that everything begins with faith, and then God helps to transform us through prayer, so that it becomes natural or easy to follow the commandments/Law ("my yoke is easy").  Now I agree that none of us will achieve this level of perfection (at least in this life), but we still have to make an attempt, ask for forgiveness when fail, and then Christ will pick us back up again.  We're sort of like children learning to walk.

That's a great summary, Gosso; I think you hit the nail on the head.

The New Testament makes it clear in different passages that both faith and works/behavior are important, but that faith comes first and is far more important--because true faith in Christ will naturally influence one's deeds as a reflection of that faith, whereas deeds without faith can be tainted by various personal motives or a sense of self-important righteousness. Here are two passages that discuss this:

But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,”? but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”?

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”?and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

[Gosso]

That's a great summary, Gosso; I think you hit the nail on the head.

The ethics and morals are one of the areas that attracts me to Christianity.  I want the challenge of trying to become a virtuous person.  Hopefully I won't end up as a self-righteous jerk, but rather enter a type of "flow" state where virtue just becomes natural.  I was originally attracted to Stoicism for this reason, but it lacked the charm and "staying power" of Christianity.

[Gosso]

i probably see it a bit differently from you because i think the will/drive to change (the "sink in" part) comes from within.. its what brought you to the church in the first place, the church may (and hopefully does) act  as a multiplier of that drive and if being committed helps that then "all good by me"... 

i am more inclined see science and religion as having overlap, one deals with the observable universe the other deals with how we interact with and observe it, they have different areas of expertise and each covers areas the other does not, but they both operate in a world of interactive processing.

i to tend to think arguments over which (sci vs religion) is 100% correct are hot air as well,  they tend to come from a very limited "either-or" perspective on both sides of the argument..

It seems to me our thinking is pretty closely aligned.  It's difficult to describe the "sinking in".  CS Lewis describes it as Christ building a castle in our heart/soul to live in.  So it's a joining together...making the two whole...making the inner like the outer.

You're right about there being overlap between science and religion...I was thinking of the hardcore atheists and fundamental religious people.

[Mountaineer]

Just watched this 15 minute video:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc ... cannibals/

It's an amazing story, and I like the fact that the 77-year old Father was able to return to this place after so many years.

An amazing story indeed!  The Gospel really can change lives and cultures. 

... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

Kshartle,

I already gave my perspective a couple of days ago in the Al Q thread, but I just ran across this that you might be interested in.  I have not studied it in depth:

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/ ... fss_papers

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

Why do you guys think God says that murder and stealing are wrong? Why did he decide that for us?

Probably because it leads to further hatred, anger, and violence.  Not that pacifism is the answer.  I think this quote from G. K. Chesterton sums it up well:

The command of Christ is impossible, but it is not insane; it is rather sanity preached to a planet of lunatics. If the whole world was suddenly stricken with a sense of humour it would find itself mechanically fulfilling the Sermon on the Mount.

I laughed for about two minutes after reading that.

The above quote was taken from, "Tolstoy and the Cult of Simplicity."

More gold from Chesterton:

Some think that the return to nature consists in drinking no wine; some think that it consists in drinking a great deal more than is good for them.

It is natural, according to the humanitarian revolutionist, to kill other people with dynamite and himself with vegetarianism.

Now, this heroic desire to return to nature, is, of course, in some respects, rather like the heroic desire of a kitten to return to its own tail.

[doodle]

Veracity of Bible under more scrutiny: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/scien ... =dayp&_r=0

[kka]

Veracity of Bible under more scrutiny: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/scien ... =dayp&_r=0

Hardly.
http://blogs.christianpost.com/dear-eph ... lse-19994/

[Kshartle]

It's not the parting of the red sea, not the plagues of frogs and boils, not the rising of the dead......it's the camel part that really sealed it for me. Ahahahahahahahah. Brilliant critical analysis of the bible NYtimes. Bravo.

Maybe when it was translated they incorrectly wrote camel and meant some other pack animal. Did they have mules?

[ns3]

I would like to point out that Camels in the Bible go back farther than Abraham. See the photo below.....

[Gosso]

Veracity of Bible under more scrutiny: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/scien ... =dayp&_r=0

I for one support your attack on biblical literalism.  Didn't Alan Watts say it was like eating the menu rather than using it to order the food.  Christians need to be careful when reading the Bible, it is like expecting a child to pick up a book on quantum mechanics and somehow understand everything about the subject.

[ns3]

Veracity of Bible under more scrutiny: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/11/scien ... =dayp&_r=0

I for one support your attack on biblical literalism.  Didn't Alan Watts say it was like eating the menu rather than using it to order the food.  Christians need to be careful when reading the Bible, it is like expecting a child to pick up a book on quantum mechanics and somehow understand everything about the subject.

Amen.

My current thinking on the subject is that there is divine inspiration in the Bible but it is not the inerrant and infallible "Word of God" that it is made out to be by the literalists.

For the esteemed members here who still hold to the latter persuasion, forget Abraham and whether or not camels were ridden in his day, what do you think about the question of whether women should keep silence in the churches and whether they should have their heads covered (in other words New Testament stuff).

[Xan]

For the esteemed members here who still hold to the latter persuasion, forget Abraham and whether or not camels were ridden in his day, what do you think about the question of whether women should keep silence in the churches and whether they should have their heads covered (in other words New Testament stuff).

I'm not sure to what level I'm a "literalist", but my wife does enjoy wearing hats to church, especially on Easter, and our church doesn't ordain women.

[Mountaineer]

My current thinking on the subject is that there is divine inspiration in the Bible but it is not the inerrant and infallible "Word of God" that it is made out to be by the literalists.

For the esteemed members here who still hold to the latter persuasion, forget Abraham and whether or not camels were ridden in his day, what do you think about the question of whether women should keep silence in the churches and whether they should have their heads covered (in other words New Testament stuff).

Scriptures indicate Satan will use many methods to distract and tempt us and try to get us to doubt God's Word just as he tried to tempt Christ for 40 days to have glory "now".  I suggest if you have specific questions about the Scriptural meaning of head coverings and silence, you should discuss your questions with a Christian Pastor who is fluent in Koine Greek; he will be able to give you the nuances of the verses in question and how they fit in the overall message of Salvation.  Personally, I would choose an LC-MS Pastor since he will help you understand the theology of the cross vs. the theology of glory.  Your questions deal with womens suffarage and it is a very broad subject to cover in a brief manner.  My perspective is the answer deals with "headship" and roles as given to us by God, but if you do not believe that Scripture is God's Word there is not much I can do over the internet that will be meaningful to you.

... Mountaineer

[ns3]

I suggest if you have specific questions about the Scriptural meaning of head coverings and silence, you should discuss your questions with a Christian Pastor who is fluent in Koine Greek; he will be able to give you the nuances of the verses in question and how they fit in the overall message of Salvation.

I AM an ordained Christian pastor (believe it or not) and though I'm not fluent in Koine Greek I am fluent in Strong's concordance, both the  Greek and Hebrew footnotes. Also read a lot of other Greek stuff (interlinear New Testament?) you would probably recognize but I can't remember right now.

Having said that, I must admit I haven't kept up on the current teachings about head coverings in relation to Christian salvation. I suspect there has probably been a lot of ground breaking work on the subject since I lost interest. Glory Hallelujah! Perhaps you would like to share it with the rest of us so we may be equally blessed as you?

[Gosso]

I'm not sure to what level I'm a "literalist", but my wife does enjoy wearing hats to church, especially on Easter, and our church doesn't ordain women.

I'm not entirely sure where I fall along the literalistic spectrum either, but I tend to agree with St. Augustine that the creation story can be taken symbolically.  The creation story's intention is to inform us that God set the Universe into motion, but that the exact details are beyond our understanding.  We can then use science to help fill in the gaps as best we can.

When I read the Old Testament I focus on the story and what it has to teach me, rather than if it is historically or scientifically true.  I tend to think a lot of it could be historical, but it wouldn't hurt my faith if it turned out not to be.  Blaise Pascal even tells us that the Old Testament should be read primarily from a spiritual point of view, which I tend to agree with.

The Gospels I take as oral tradition passed down from Jesus and eyewitness accounts.

Edit: fixed awkward wording.

[ns3]

When I read the Old Testament I focus on the story and what it has to teach me, rather than if it is historically or scientifically true.  I tend to think a lot of it could be historical, but it wouldn't hurt my faith if it turned out not to be. 

That's basically the way I feel about it too. I don't really think about whether it's literal history until somebody else challenges it.

But having said that I'm betting that the Camel thing will eventually come out in favor of the Bible story being historically true - at least as far as the camels go - based on how a lot of these things have shaken out in the past.

The story of Noah's ark, taken literally as a worldwide event, not so much.

[Mountaineer]

I suggest if you have specific questions about the Scriptural meaning of head coverings and silence, you should discuss your questions with a Christian Pastor who is fluent in Koine Greek; he will be able to give you the nuances of the verses in question and how they fit in the overall message of Salvation.

I AM an ordained Christian pastor (believe it or not) and though I'm not fluent in Koine Greek I am fluent in Strong's concordance, both the  Greek and Hebrew footnotes. Also read a lot of other Greek stuff (interlinear New Testament?) you would probably recognize but I can't remember right now.

Having said that, I must admit I haven't kept up on the current teachings about head coverings in relation to Christian salvation. I suspect there has probably been a lot of ground breaking work on the subject since I lost interest. Glory Hallelujah! Perhaps you would like to share it with the rest of us so we may be equally blessed as you?

ns3,

Perhaps you would enjoy reading this sermon.  The sermon text is 1 Tim 2:1-15.

http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=32961

I would be interested in your comments after you have read and processed what it says, that is if you choose to read it. 

On a second topic, you also might enjoy the book "Broken" by Jonathan Fisk.  It speaks to many issues related to those coming from an Evangelical background.  It helped me understand how true Christianity fills the void in ones life.  I don't know about you, but when I grew up, many "Christians" could be very judgmental as they were influenced by a "fire and brimstone" Law being preached rather than a balance of Law and Gospel.  I guess our sinful human nature craves feeling superior to others rather than approaching others with an attitude of service to them and sharing Christ's message of repentance, love and forgiveness.

Peace,  ... Mountaineer

[Mountaineer]

New book that might be of interest to those who wish to pursue "figuring out religion":

Making the Case for Christianity provides timely and usable discussions about current objections to Christianity, including:
The Existence of God
How a God of Love Allows Suffering
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Endorsements

"Making the Case for Christianity is a carefully reasoned and clearly written defense of some of the central truth-claims of historic Christianity. ... This volume testifies well to the truth that historic Christianity is a faith that involves knowledge and is indeed compatible with reason."
—Kenneth Samples, Senior Research Scholar at Reasons to Believe, Author of 7 Truths That Changed the World. (Baker, 2012)

"A brilliant compilation of fresh articles addressing and answering the major, current objections the devout Christian is forced to address. ... This is an exceptional book that I enthusiastically endorse."
—Khaldoun A. Sweis, PhD, Chair and Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Olive-Harvey College in Chicago, Editor of Christian Apologetics: An Anthology of Primary Sources (Zondervan, 2012) and Debating Christian Theism (Oxford, 2013)

"Distinctively Lutheran, patently Christian, and genuinely winsome. ... Every page of this book communicates the Gospel and exalts Jesus. Indeed, such a Christocentric methodology is the best way to make the case for Christianity."
—David W. Jones, PhD, Associate Professor of Christian Ethics, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina


Making the Case for Christianity was edited by Korey D. Maas and Dr. Adam S. Francisco. Contributors include Dr. John Bombaro, Dr. Angus Menuge, Dr. Joshua Pagan, Craig A. Parton, and Rev. Mark A. Pierson.

Interview with author:  http://academic.cphblogs.com/new/korey- ... -264738737


... Mountaineer

[MediumTex]

What about the Old Testament death penalty for homosexuality?

Where are we at on that one?

Another one that is peculiar is that God chose Noah as the only one in the whole world who was worth saving (plus his extended family), and yet right after God saved him from the flood he was found laying around in his tent drunk and naked.  Was that really the best person in the whole world and the only one worth saving?  Also, I wonder about how he rounded up animals that were native to other continents and why, if all future humans came from his sons and their wives, there weren't some pretty serious human inbreeding problems after that.

Another question is whether Adam and Eve were Jewish.  Also, who did Cain marry when Adam and Eve got kicked out of the Garden of Eden?

Another one I wonder about is God wanting the male members of his chosen people to cut off the loose skin at the end of their penises.  It seems like if God had preferred the "circumcised look" he would have just made the penis that way to start with.  Deeper into that discussion, I would probably ask about the practice of the rabbi sucking the blood from the wound caused by the circumcision.  That one really challenges my notions about what God's plan for humanity might include.

Another one I wonder about is the second set of Ten Commandments in Exodus 34 that were supposed to be a copy of the first set that Moses broke (and apparently didn't remember until he wrote Deuteronomy later on or else he would have presumably pointed out to God that the second set of commandments did not match the first set).

Here is the second set of the Ten Commandments from Exodus 34:

1.  Thou shalt worship no other god.
2.  Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3.  The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.
4.  Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day rest.
5.  Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks.
6.  Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord God.
7.  Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven.
8.  Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left until the morning.
9.  The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seeth a young goat in his mother's milk.

Eight of the revised set of Ten Commandments are different from the first set in Deuteronomy.  Also, Exodus 34 says that Moses spent 40 days in the woods with no food or water while collecting the second set of Ten Commandments.  No human can go 40 days without water and 40 days without food would probably kill most people.

Moving forward to the New Testament, it always bothered me that at the end of the Gospel of John, the writer talks about how when Jesus was crucified (or it might have been when he was resurrected), many dead religious leaders from the past spontaneously rose from their graves in the middle of an earthquake that coincided with the event and these previously long-dead people walked around for a while before presumably returning to their graves (or ascending into Heaven).

What bothers me is that the other three Gospels make no mention of this earthquake and dead people popping up out of their graves.  How could you possibly leave something like that out of a story about Jesus's life?  Also, you would think that Paul and the other letter writers in the New Testament would mention this amazing ending to Jesus's life on earth.  It seems like the Romans would have also recorded something as significant as an earthquake that coincided with the spontaneous popping out of the ground of a bunch of dead people.  I mean, don't you think that Josephus's journal entry for that day would have said something like:

"You're never going to believe what happened today!  When they killed that Jesus dude a big earthquake happened and then a bunch of dead bodies started popping out of the ground and they were just walking around like they hadn't been totally dead right before then.  Holy zombies!  I've never seen anything like it in my life!"

[Libertarian666]

The wonderful thing about religion, or any other faith-based system, is that you can always explain away any objections by saying "God works in mysterious ways" or the like.

Of course this isn't very convincing to those who don't have the same faith, but to hell with them! 

[MediumTex]

The wonderful thing about religion, or any other faith-based system, is that you can always explain away any objections by saying "God works in mysterious ways" or the like.

Of course this isn't very convincing to those who don't have the same faith, but to hell with them! 

We'll just let them live in the dangerous world where people get hurt and the Devil will be their God.

Isn't that sort of the current Islamic party line?  If you aren't a Muslim you aren't going to go to Heaven, and if you make any fuss about your own beliefs you might get hurt.  Of course, looking back a few centuries that was the Christian party line as well, and quite a few centuries before that it was the Jewish party line.

[Mountaineer]

So 35 pages in, and we are clearly no closer to 'figuring out' Christianity. Anyone want to give it a shot with Judaism, Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism?

It may not be as complex as you think.  Buddhism is supposedly an offshoot of Hinduism and Islam and Christianity have their roots in Judaism.  So, not four more to process, maybe only two more?  You can start, I'll catch up on page 100. 

... Mountaineer

[Gosso]

So 35 pages in, and we are clearly no closer to 'figuring out' Christianity. Anyone want to give it a shot with Judaism, Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism?

This thread has been great for me, and helped me really think through what I truly believe.  My Christian beliefs have been greatly strengthened.  Thanks to all that have participated so far.

***

MT,

I always find it funny that atheists/agnostics take the Bible more literally than some/most Christians.

I realize your comments are directed more towards Protestants/Evangelicals and sola scriptura.  However, this is one of the reasons why I lean towards Catholicism since there is a long biblical interpretative tradition where faith, reason, and tradition are used for a proper interpretation.  If there is disagreement within the Catholic Church then the Pope will settle the dispute and life goes on.  I realize the Catholic Church is far from perfect (and to be honest I don't go to church, yet), but I find their interpretations of Scripture reasonable and satisfies both faith and reason.

This short YouTube clip from Fr. Barron will help explain the Catholic perspective (7:34): http://youtu.be/htxOjJHB5-8

As for the saints rising up from the dead, I take it as poetic.  It is only two lines in Matthew, and has almost no importance for anyone's faith, as far as I know.  I just don't worry about it, unless the Catholic Church for some reason deemed it to be important.  St. Paul never mentions it in his letters/theology, as far as I know.

I find it best to take the Bible as a whole and also to have it interpreted by professionals.  There is no denying that there is a lot of weird stuff in the Bible, which is why I think it's important to have a living authority on the Bible and other Catholic matters, ie the Pope.

[Mountaineer]

This thread has been great for me, and helped me really think through what I truly believe.  My Christian beliefs have been greatly strengthened.  Thanks to all that have participated so far.

***

My sentiments exactly. This thread has even provided me "fodder" for some very meaningful discussions with my Pastor. I have learned a lot. Thanks to all.

... Mountaineer