The Coming Evangelical Collapse

[Husker_x]

As to my benefits pkg, I find solice in my faith, I find fufillment in service both to God and to others. I do not act as I do in fear, but in love. I enjoy my spirituality and find that when my mind, body, and spirit are out of balance, I am unhappy. To ignore what I seem biologically as well as socialogically compelled to do is not logical. Indeed, if the persuit of self actuallization is inconsistant with my human nature then both I and Mr. Maslow have some serious rethinking to do.

As to the presumtion that the commanallity to which I reffered above is a dogmatic adherance to a singular notion of what you've been told we wack job Christians beleive, it is not.

As with any persuit of deeper understanding, it is as much the journey as the destination I seek. I'm pretty sure I've made it clear that faith and "investigation" are IMO better married than devorced. In my breif study of astronomy I glimpsed the vastness of a universe that is simply behond human comprehension. In my brief study of nuclear physics I glimpsed a multiplicity of structure and design that too, is inmeasurably beyond us.

To think I, or any person could begin to know all that is, is insane vanity. Conversely, to claim to know all that is not, is likewise.

I suspect, that you have a fundamental problem with the notion that one group of people stand if moral judgement of another. This is understandable, I agree with the sentiment. It appeals to our inate sense of justice, but to some degree, aren't you doing likewise?

This is a cousin of the idea that Landlord expressed earlier, which is that religion is useful. Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, spiritualists, Transcendentalists, Christians, and Jews all find solace in religion. It makes them happy, too. This allows me to say that at least in some capacity, some form, religion may be useful to some people. What it doesn't allow me to say is that one religion is true, to make a positive claim that gods exist, or that religion is necessary for happiness, all of which are more to the actual point of religion, especially monotheism. Christianity is often looked at in the context of a spiritual walk or journey, but I've always found this to be an incomplete understanding. Christianity doesn't pass itself off as one truth, or a truth, or a part of truth. It's THE truth, the only truth, the absolute truth––once and for all, now and forever. Biblical literalists do you one better and claim that their storybook is not filled with wise parables and metaphors, but that it is 100% true, factually accurate, and free of contradiction. Your experience of Christianity apparently hasn't led you to that conclusion, which is good, but it has its own set of problems.

It would be the epitome of arrogance to claim to know all that is or isn't, one because you don't, and two because you can't. Even the things we claim to know we don't know absolutely, or in every detail. I never have and don't claim to know God doesn't exist. Neither does hardly any atheist I've ever known or heard of. It's a common misconception that they do. Traditional monotheistic gods do, however, have to contend with the omni-trilemma (science, potence, and benevolence).

I don't have a problem with people judging morality. What I have a problem with is when people open a book of fantastic stories, tell me it's literal, or it's metaphorical, or both, and that it was given to them by God, and by this authority they are the supreme arbiters of truth. However much this sentiment might not agree with the personal views of people on this board, it is preached from pulpits all over the country. I have a beef with the fundamentalists, yes, and what they do to children. I have a philosophical disagreement with religion, which can be hashed out in open discussion with whoever wants to have one. I don't deliberately conflate the two except when faced with the proposition that religion in its totality is good.

The bible isn't a book that is 100% factual. As someone who believes in Jesus as the Savior and grown up in school learning about things, i'll make that statement. Nothing is more annoying than people that quote every little thing from the bible and take it to be exactly what it says. It wasn't meant to be that way.

Okay, so which parts are factual and which parts are metaphorical? What about the Resurrection? What about heaven and hell? What about Genesis? What about Exodus? What about....

If the bible doesn't mean what it says, and isn't factually accurate, and is known to allow for thousands if not millions of interpretations (check denominations for a low number), how can it be THE one unifying source of morality, justice, and a window looking on the face of God?

Also, the notion that there is no god is quite amusing, since scientists even have said MULTIPLE times, that there is a greater being, whatever or whomever it may be.

No they haven't. And if they have, it wasn't thanks to science. It was an opinion not based in any way on scientific naturalism and is therefore without authority. And even if it was thanks to science, which it isn't, and we have overwhelming evidence for some intelligent force behind the universe, you still have all you work ahead of you for the bible and Yahweh.

The video is the slightest sliver of the kinds of things that go on in Christianity specifically and religion in general. His question, "What have I ever done to you?" was in response to someone who said that the decline of religion couldn't happen soon enough. Knapplc personally probably hasn't done anything, but if you want to know why non-religious care about the goings-on in religion, the Jesus Camp video is a small fragment of the deception, scams, lies and nonsense preached all across the world in the name of religion.

 

[HuskersNow]

the notion that there is no god is quite amusing, since scientists even have said MULTIPLE times, that there is a greater being, whatever or whomever it may be. There simply isn't a way to scientifically prove everything that has happened on this earth, ever heard the term miracle?

Who are these scientists that you wrote about? I could easily find scientists who don't believe in a god and believe that

everything has come about from natural processes. So relying on scientists in general to prove that God exists is, in my

opinion, quite amusing.

There is no reason to rely on miracles to fill possible gaps in our knowledge. Thousands of years ago miracles and divinities

were presented as explanations for almost every natural occurrence, but as time has gone by most people have accepted

scientific explanations for most things. Besides, I have never heard of a single miracle that couldn't be explained logically without

the need to say, "look everybody, it's God!"

 

[huskertim]

My friend, I think you paint with a broad brush. We Christians are not of one mind any more than we Husker fans are. Some husker fans hate the oppostion and will throw obsenities (and objects) at other fans, some will applaud them. Is the later wrong, do they not enbody the passion of the sport if not in perfect spirit. Some think we need to stay in a conference that affords us the best shot at going undefeated in our division and some would like to see more competitive games.

From my perspective Christianity is the true path, but God didn't put me in charge, and I suspect, he hasn't let me in on all the details of his grand scheme either. So, I say live and let live. If God is, I'm sure he can handle things just fine without my interference.

 

[HUSKER 37]

The idea that the Bible was written in consistantly literal prose is rediculous. As a complelation of many different authors over many centuries, it would be hard to assume that any one style of writing would be exclusive. The general concensus that I've encounted with theologians is that the Bible is many things, a geneology and history of the Hebrew people, a philosophical guide to life, a moral compass upon which to build the laws of man, among others. The point is that the authors give us a window into the human experience and relate the trials as well as the joys therein. It is far more a book about Gods blessings than his derisions but man sees only what he will open his eyes to see.

Surprisingly, your posts in this thread more closely resemble the way I feel...Or at least the way I'd want to think I feel.

I sometimes wonder why people seem to forget how to converse with God, or do they not all have that innate ability?

People were astounded by my then 4 year old Son talking about what life was like before he was born..Now at 9 years of age, he doesn't remember ever thinking about it.

By conversing with God, I don't mean smoking cigars with George Burns or even hearing voices, but rather, being able to enter his mind and trying to keep up with all the answered questions that occur to you to ask.

I'll admit, I've not studied Religion(s), but I suspect most if not all would condemn you for even trying to meld? with God...But how can you not feel God's disappointment in all Religions or their Bibles?

I was a Freshman at UNL trying to cope with the sudden deaths of my Father and my big Brother the first time I seriously tried to read any Bible...I kept having a strange deja vu feeling while reading it and the (several) mistakes and misquotes practically jumped out of the page at me.

It was later explained to me that most of the "inaccuracies" were due to bad interpretation...But with all the omissions kept out by the Church and all the "creative shaping" to further their causes, I now suspect that the Bibles were the "National Enquirers" of their day.

I once asked God who created him...The answer made perfect sense at the time, but now..still makes my head hurt a little.

 

[knapplc]

We are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity.

Sorry for throwing this back to the original line of this thread, but every time I see this thread title I think, "That's probably not such a bad thing."

There are heaps of woe we can lay at the feet of religion. It's abused, misused and suffused with corruption. Religion is a human construct subject to the problems of all human constructs - no matter how noble its intended purpose, avarice, lust for power, jealousy and various phobias combine to send it off on tangents it was never intended to take, and often these tangents are horrible in consequence.

Religion is like a forest grown out of control. The larger trees choke light and rob resources from young saplings. They leach nutrients from the soil and return little, striving only for their own gain. Nature has a way of taking care of this problem - it has forest fires that come through and destroy the riotous old growth, allowing the forest to rejuvenate itself with younger, fresher, more vibrant growth.

I don't think that would be such a bad thing in the modern world of religion.

 

[huskertim]

The idea that the Bible was written in consistantly literal prose is rediculous. As a complelation of many different authors over many centuries, it would be hard to assume that any one style of writing would be exclusive. The general concensus that I've encounted with theologians is that the Bible is many things, a geneology and history of the Hebrew people, a philosophical guide to life, a moral compass upon which to build the laws of man, among others. The point is that the authors give us a window into the human experience and relate the trials as well as the joys therein. It is far more a book about Gods blessings than his derisions but man sees only what he will open his eyes to see.

Surprisingly, your posts in this thread more closely resemble the way I feel...Or at least the way I'd want to think I feel.

I sometimes wonder why people seem to forget how to converse with God, or do they not all have that innate ability?

People were astounded by my then 4 year old Son talking about what life was like before he was born..Now at 9 years of age, he doesn't remember ever thinking about it.

By conversing with God, I don't mean smoking cigars with George Burns or even hearing voices, but rather, being able to enter his mind and trying to keep up with all the answered questions that occur to you to ask.

I'll admit, I've not studied Religion(s), but I suspect most if not all would condemn you for even trying to meld? with God...But how can you not feel God's disappointment in all Religions or their Bibles?

I was a Freshman at UNL trying to cope with the sudden deaths of my Father and my big Brother the first time I seriously tried to read any Bible...I kept having a strange deja vu feeling while reading it and the (several) mistakes and misquotes practically jumped out of the page at me.

It was later explained to me that most of the "inaccuracies" were due to bad interpretation...But with all the omissions kept out by the Church and all the "creative shaping" to further their causes, I now suspect that the Bibles were the "National Enquirers" of their day.

I once asked God who created him...The answer made perfect sense at the time, but now..still makes my head hurt a little.

When we seek confusion, we find it. When we seek meaning we find it. Sometimes our own mind gets in the way of knowing what we want even when we think we know, that's why we punish our cruel brains with drugs and alcohol. The weak or lazy minded can be excused for simply adherring to someone else's interpetations but it is the unique tragedy of intellect that we so often overthink lifes simplest questions and endlessly seek what is already in our pocession.

I'm sorry for your loss, perhaps in our grief we are best reminded of the blessings we could not see before. I suspect your reading of the Bible was tainted with expectations either of granduer or disappointment. Either could certainly be expected at such a time. Exit from such misery seldom comes in a great rush but rather dampens in time. Don't let sorrow corrupt your intellect or your memories of those you loved.

 

[huskertim]

We are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity.

Sorry for throwing this back to the original line of this thread, but every time I see this thread title I think, "That's probably not such a bad thing."

There are heaps of woe we can lay at the feet of religion. It's abused, misused and suffused with corruption. Religion is a human construct subject to the problems of all human constructs - no matter how noble its intended purpose, avarice, lust for power, jealousy and various phobias combine to send it off on tangents it was never intended to take, and often these tangents are horrible in consequence.

Religion is like a forest grown out of control. The larger trees choke light and rob resources from young saplings. They leach nutrients from the soil and return little, striving only for their own gain. Nature has a way of taking care of this problem - it has forest fires that come through and destroy the riotous old growth, allowing the forest to rejuvenate itself with younger, fresher, more vibrant growth.

I don't think that would be such a bad thing in the modern world of religion.

I think the author here is referring specifically to the evangaelical brand of Christianity not religion as a whole.

Of course religion is frought with the perils of human inperfection, aren't all human endeavors. I ask you this, if all religions ceased to exist tommorrow, do you think that nothing would replace them? With the decline of Chrisianity in the US we see marked rises in the rates of other religions such as Islam, Wicca, and Buddism (yes it's as much phiosiphy as religion but it makes the point). In the absence of these even, people find causes beyond themselves and often as not engage in even more fanatical behaviors. Look at the actions of ratical evironmentalists, animal rights people, anarcist (didn't want to forget SOCAL), not to mention all the cults of personallity masquradeing as political or spritual movements.

Religion is not the cause of mans laments, man is the cause of mans laments, and eventually nature will solve that littel dilema too.

 

[knapplc]

I think the author here is referring specifically to the evangaelical brand of Christianity not religion as a whole.

Of course religion is frought with the perils of human inperfection, aren't all human endeavors. I ask you this, if all religions ceased to exist tommorrow, do you think that nothing would replace them? With the decline of Chrisianity in the US we see marked rises in the rates of other religions such as Islam, Wicca, and Buddism (yes it's as much phiosiphy as religion but it makes the point). In the absence of these even, people find causes beyond themselves and often as not engage in even more fanatical behaviors. Look at the actions of ratical evironmentalists, animal rights people, anarcist (didn't want to forget SOCAL), not to mention all the cults of personallity masquradeing as political or spritual movements.

Religion is not the cause of mans laments, man is the cause of mans laments, and eventually nature will solve that littel dilema too.

Totally agree. Man is man's problem, not politics or religion or what have you. It's the idea that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Guns are just the tool. Some tools are more dangerous than others, but in the absence of one tool, humans will create another.

If all religion ceased to exist tomorrow we would still have cult followings, we would still have blind zealotry, we would still have mass wrongs committed in the name of purported good.

 

[Husker_x]

Here's where I grow suspicious of this line of argumentation. According to all kinds of believers, their particular religion isn't a human construct. It's a divine construct, a revealed construct, and in many cases including Christianity, the final and absolute construct. Regardless of character, honesty, justice, kindness, or virtue at all, if you take the bible at its word, failing to accept that a Jewish carpenter and rabbi was cruelly murdered and then resurrected in first century Palestine––events which you didn't witness and otherwise defy every scientific precedent available to us––makes you worthy of eternal torture. What else apart from religion could make someone believe something like this? What other force besides pure credulity could account for this worldview? Now it's possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe this, but you'll have to admit up front that you've given up any claims to orthodoxy and you've pretty much dismissed the bible as a source of anything but interesting stories. That would leave us only then with the question why not drop the label?

If religion disappeared tomorrow people would still do bad things, sure. A sucker would still be born every minute. But nestled within the very seed of religion is faith, believing or claiming to know things you don't and can't know. When preachers in even the most liberal, toothless churches mount the pulpit to tell us who God is or what he wants or why things happen on earth or how God loves, hates, disapproves, or condones this, that, or the other thing––they say it so confidently, so matter-of-factly, yet so rarely does anyone bother to ask them how they came by this information, or why they should believe it.

It seems to me that if you're willing to act upon what you perceive to be the will of gods, you can believe anything, justify anything. And history both ancient and modern show us what people are willing to do when they think they're acting on God's orders. You've probably heard that even the inquisitors tortured people into accepting Christ because it was better to suffer temporarily on earth than to suffer eternally in hell. And where did they learn about hell? From religion.

 

[knapplc]

Here's where I grow suspicious of this line of argumentation. According to all kinds of believers, their particular religion isn't a human construct. It's a divine construct, a revealed construct, and in many cases including Christianity, the final and absolute construct. Regardless of character, honesty, justice, kindness, or virtue at all, if you take the bible at its word, failing to accept that a Jewish carpenter and rabbi was cruelly murdered and then resurrected in first century Palestine––events which you didn't witness and otherwise defy every scientific precedent available to us––makes you worthy of eternal torture. What else apart from religion could make someone believe something like this? What other force besides pure credulity could account for this worldview? Now it's possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe this, but you'll have to admit up front that you've given up any claims to orthodoxy and you've pretty much dismissed the bible as a source of anything but interesting stories. That would leave us only then with the question why not drop the label?

If religion disappeared tomorrow people would still do bad things, sure. A sucker would still be born every minute. But nestled within the very seed of religion is faith, believing or claiming to know things you don't and can't know. When preachers in even the most liberal, toothless churches mount the pulpit to tell us who God is or what he wants or why things happen on earth or how God loves, hates, disapproves, or condones this, that, or the other thing––they say it so confidently, so matter-of-factly, yet so rarely does anyone bother to ask them how they came by this information, or why they should believe it.

It seems to me that if you're willing to act upon what you perceive to be the will of gods, you can believe anything, justify anything. And history both ancient and modern show us what people are willing to do when they think they're acting on God's orders. You've probably heard that even the inquisitors tortured people into accepting Christ because it was better to suffer temporarily on earth than to suffer eternally in hell. And where did they learn about hell? From religion.

You're describing extremism. It takes many forms. For you it's religion, for SOCAL it's government.

 

[Husker_x]

Here's where I grow suspicious of this line of argumentation. According to all kinds of believers, their particular religion isn't a human construct. It's a divine construct, a revealed construct, and in many cases including Christianity, the final and absolute construct. Regardless of character, honesty, justice, kindness, or virtue at all, if you take the bible at its word, failing to accept that a Jewish carpenter and rabbi was cruelly murdered and then resurrected in first century Palestine––events which you didn't witness and otherwise defy every scientific precedent available to us––makes you worthy of eternal torture. What else apart from religion could make someone believe something like this? What other force besides pure credulity could account for this worldview? Now it's possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe this, but you'll have to admit up front that you've given up any claims to orthodoxy and you've pretty much dismissed the bible as a source of anything but interesting stories. That would leave us only then with the question why not drop the label?

If religion disappeared tomorrow people would still do bad things, sure. A sucker would still be born every minute. But nestled within the very seed of religion is faith, believing or claiming to know things you don't and can't know. When preachers in even the most liberal, toothless churches mount the pulpit to tell us who God is or what he wants or why things happen on earth or how God loves, hates, disapproves, or condones this, that, or the other thing––they say it so confidently, so matter-of-factly, yet so rarely does anyone bother to ask them how they came by this information, or why they should believe it.

It seems to me that if you're willing to act upon what you perceive to be the will of gods, you can believe anything, justify anything. And history both ancient and modern show us what people are willing to do when they think they're acting on God's orders. You've probably heard that even the inquisitors tortured people into accepting Christ because it was better to suffer temporarily on earth than to suffer eternally in hell. And where did they learn about hell? From religion.

You're describing extremism. It takes many forms. For you it's religion, for SOCAL it's government.

Maybe you could describe for me a non-extreme religion and what it would be composed of? I honestly and sincerely don't know what you're referring to, at least not exactly.

 

[Landlord]

Regardless of character, honesty, justice, kindness, or virtue at all, if you take the bible at its word, failing to accept that a Jewish carpenter and rabbi was cruelly murdered and then resurrected in first century Palestine––events which you didn't witness and otherwise defy every scientific precedent available to us––makes you worthy of eternal torture. What else apart from religion could make someone believe something like this? What other force besides pure credulity could account for this worldview? Now it's possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe this, but you'll have to admit up front that you've given up any claims to orthodoxy and you've pretty much dismissed the bible as a source of anything but interesting stories. That would leave us only then with the question why not drop the label?

This isn't entirely accurate, at least not according to how I've read the Bible. This is how I see it:

We are called to live moral, just and kind lives above anything. If you do live your life that way, an inescapable consequence is that you are always searching for what is "right". God rewards that, because that is the ideal human nature. If you have never heard the gospel, or had a thought about God, or didn't know anything about Jesus, as long as you live your life to the best of your ability and are constantly seeking to know and do what is truly right, then either God will bless you via sending someone into your life for you to hear the good news, or it's of no consequence and you are forgiven and saved through grace regardless. I'm yet to decide if I believe that you have to personally know about and believe in Jesus Christ to be saved, but if you do and you are seeking righteousness then God will give you that knowledge.

A bit off-topic, I just wanted to throw that out there.

 

[knapplc]

You're describing extremism. It takes many forms. For you it's religion, for SOCAL it's government.

Maybe you could describe for me a non-extreme religion and what it would be composed of? I honestly and sincerely don't know what you're referring to, at least not exactly.

You have your bug about religion and SOCAL has his about government. For SOCAL every form of government is a "coercive monopoly on theft and violence." For you, every religion is "extreme." You may use different phrases once in a while, but like SOCAL, the song remains the same.

 

[Husker_x]

Regardless of character, honesty, justice, kindness, or virtue at all, if you take the bible at its word, failing to accept that a Jewish carpenter and rabbi was cruelly murdered and then resurrected in first century Palestine––events which you didn't witness and otherwise defy every scientific precedent available to us––makes you worthy of eternal torture. What else apart from religion could make someone believe something like this? What other force besides pure credulity could account for this worldview? Now it's possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe this, but you'll have to admit up front that you've given up any claims to orthodoxy and you've pretty much dismissed the bible as a source of anything but interesting stories. That would leave us only then with the question why not drop the label?

This isn't entirely accurate, at least not according to how I've read the Bible. This is how I see it:

We are called to live moral, just and kind lives above anything. If you do live your life that way, an inescapable consequence is that you are always searching for what is "right". God rewards that, because that is the ideal human nature. If you have never heard the gospel, or had a thought about God, or didn't know anything about Jesus, as long as you live your life to the best of your ability and are constantly seeking to know and do what is truly right, then either God will bless you via sending someone into your life for you to hear the good news, or it's of no consequence and you are forgiven and saved through grace regardless. I'm yet to decide if I believe that you have to personally know about and believe in Jesus Christ to be saved, but if you do and you are seeking righteousness then God will give you that knowledge.

A bit off-topic, I just wanted to throw that out there.

I think it's very much on topic, actually.

So when Jesus says––or is claimed to have said––that "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" (emphasis mine), that's not to be taken literally?

How about Romans 9? "And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

Your scenario above seems to be an invention. An understandable invention, but not present in the bible. It's also a Catch-22 like the kind kind that Mormons use when they come knocking at your door. They hand you a book, tell you to pray, and if you're sincere enough, God will reveal himself to you. Well that's terrific. If it works, God is true. And if it doesn't happen, then I wasn't sincere enough, but God is still true.

In my situation, I have heard the good news. A thousand versions of it, some contradictory, all slightly different from one another. My response to these glad tidings is that I think it hasn't been sufficiently demonstrated. No argument or evidence has been presented to me so far that would make me believe it. Which then leaves me with experience and usefulness. To the first, the experiences of every religion resemble each other so much that I find them better explained with psychology than divinity. About usefulness, a much bigger issue but the summary is that while I think religion certainly has its uses in peoples' lives, there's nothing about that I've seen that makes me think we couldn't do without it.

 

[Husker_x]

You're describing extremism. It takes many forms. For you it's religion, for SOCAL it's government.

Maybe you could describe for me a non-extreme religion and what it would be composed of? I honestly and sincerely don't know what you're referring to, at least not exactly.

You have your bug about religion and SOCAL has his about government. For SOCAL every form of government is a "coercive monopoly on theft and violence." For you, every religion is "extreme." You may use different phrases once in a while, but like SOCAL, the song remains the same.

That wasn't even an attempt to describe something non-extreme. I actuality have gone out of my way to separate fundamentalism from liberalism in Christianity about five times. My point is that they both come from the same root, or are different expressions of the same basic ideas.