Misconceptions of Christianity

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
321

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]
There are few areas of American religious experience that has been more fraught with more abuse of the simple than this. I don’t have all the answers, but I will say I have first hand knowledge of one guy I am convinced of a certainly had his legs supernaturally healed by God. He wasn’t an amputee, but was born with a condition where his kneecaps almost faced each other inward. I don’t remember what it’s called. Anyway when he was 9, in his own church, I t’s been a long time and I don’t remember who it was now either, but somebody prayed for him.

He told me the guy squatted down in front of the seat he was sitting in and laid his legs up on his own thighs. He put his hands one on each leg by the knee and told them in the name of Jesus to be straight and they were. No sensation really, they just straightened out. He was 19 when I met him many years ago and I saw the pictures of him as a kid and it took my breath away. This is one guy I also do not believe would lie to me. Actually I knew him for over a year before he even told me and there’s no way you could know otherwise. His legs were normal.

Why doesn’t God do this more often? I don’t know for certain. Some people, many of them in my own theological tradition believe miracles ceased altogether after the birth of the church in the 1st century never to return in this age. I disagree. I will say again however as I already have that I refuse to speculate beyond what is revealed. God owes no man anything, but has nevertheless made Himself more real to me than any other fact of life. Feel free to call that what you want.

322

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]

I have read it. I am not impressed. He uses the same logic and exegessis that the word of faith movement uses. If he had an inkling of understanding about the verses he is quoting he would realize what a stupid argument it is.

323

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:
<<< I tend to agree. while there is a small argument to be made based off of Paul’s writings to Corinth, that argument falls flat when you consider Paul’s opponents where still preaching Christ in accordance with common standards of the early church. Not full out heresy.[/quote]I’m pretty sure you’re talking about the 1st of Philippians when Paul was in jail and some fell into self glory, taking advantage of his absence to exalt themselves among the people? Yes, they were preaching an accurate Gospel message which has power in itself even if proclaimed from a heart of pretense (a very reformed principle is bubbling about in there =] ) That is definitely different than bringing “another Jesus” and “another Gospel” which even today it’s as Paul says and not necessarily another altogether, but a perverted revision.
[/quote]

You are correct I meant philippians. Agreed it was not the same as what we have today. which is why I said it is a very weak defense for preaching God as a slave to our “faith”. That what ever we will Him to do he is forced to do as long as we have enough faith. It is absolutely sacrilegious what they are doing.

324

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]
I have read it. I am not impressed. He uses the same logic and exegessis that the word of faith movement uses. If he had an inkling of understanding about the verses he is quoting he would realize what a stupid argument it is.[/quote]OK, I confess I just glanced at it. It looked like a “where are the miracles?” outfit of which it certainly wouldn’t have been the first.

325

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I wouldn’t go that far (though I do take your points) I think that the multiverse theory is more rationale than there being a God as described in the bible. I also think that it is more internally consistent than the God of the Bible.

Also remember that I have not accepted the existence of a multiverse. I just accept that the theory seems to stack up. If a better theory comes along I am open to it. The same is not true of religious believers for whom doubting the gospel is a sin.[/quote]

I like your intellectual honesty - its refreshing.

I will disagree with one point though - God never said that we could not question our beliefs - in fact we are encouraged to constantly challenge and test them to see if they are true. It is another classic misconception about God that He is somehow afraid of human questions.

My dad is fond of saying that “did it ever occur to you that nothing ever occurs to God?” It is his way of stating that God welcomes our challenges and questions, and even our anger and frustration.

I fear you have been taught some pretty sad ideas about Christianity. You’ll find the reality is much different than that . . . you’ve accepted some of the worst oversimplifications and mischaracterizations of our beliefs . . that saddens me.[/quote]

Yes and no. There are parts of the bible where god appears open to questioning and there are parts where he goes all smitey on people for daring to doubt his word.

On the whole though it is the Church that is terrified of anyone questioning its tenets, not God and that is an important distinction.[/quote]

Which church is this? A faith not open to scrutiny is not a solid faith.[/quote]

Oh I am not playing that game. Whichever schism of the Church I refer to (and there are thousands) I will just be told that it is not the true faith.

On the whole (and there are notable exceptions) religious leaders don’t like people questioning the tenets of their faith too deeply. Faith in the Christian Church is seen as a desirable quality. Proof denies faith so the search for proof goes against the Church.[/quote]

The Catholic Church proves you wrong. We even hire Devil’s Advocates to demand Proof within the Church.

326

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Yep - God . . . God makes everything and man . . . . man sins (disobeys) . . . man dies (separation from God) and will be separated from God for all of eternity once he physically dies . . . God sends himself as a sacrifice to pay for man’s sins and create His Church (or body) . . .

Jesus (God) is resurrected from death to prove that God can save all mankind and has accepted Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins as well give us the Eucharist for the communion of Saints . . . man repents and is baptized to have the sin’s of Adam wiped clean . . . man chooses to place faith in Jesus and do works in the name of the Lord for the atonement of his sins as well as have faith in His Church’s teachings . . .

man dies, is resurrected and spends eternity in fellowship with God if he is purified before earthly death, otherwise he goes to purgatory for purification before entering God’s presence in His Kingdom, and Hell in the case of death in Mortal Sin . . . so that all future generations could understand this simple message it is recorded in the inspired word of God as begun by Moses and continued through the Apostles and also in His Church’s Doctrine. . . .

I tried to keep in a few sentences . . . [/quote]

Fixed. ;)[/quote]

OK, my turn.

There is nothing… God creates himself…God creates the universe…God creates man (deliberately making him flawed and prone to being led astray)…God creates woman…woman fulfills her destiny by leading Man astray…

God is surprised and annoyed that the Man that he created followed the inbuilt flaw that God created and went astray and therefore punishes him for something that God was ultimately responsible for…time passes…

God sends himself in the form of his own son to Earth (the mechanism for this is the rape of an innocent woman)…God on earth tells his followers that they have not been following him correctly…he then causes a friend of his to betray him and tricks everyone into believing that he is suffering even though he is an omnipotent, omniscient multidimensional being…God now expects us to follow his example of peace and goodness.

Am I close?[/quote]

No exactly, God can’t create himself. Read up on JPII’s Theology of the Body to understand Adam and Eve. God created man perfectly, however He gave him free will to follow God’s will. Queen of Earth and Heaven freely took on the Responsibility, she was not raped. Jesus never made Judas betray, free will. Jesus was in human body he felt as we would feel if being crusified. Yes on the last part.

327

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]

The whole thing is a Straw-man Argument. I never found one thing that is close to actual Christian Theology.

328

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I wouldn’t go that far (though I do take your points) I think that the multiverse theory is more rationale than there being a God as described in the bible. I also think that it is more internally consistent than the God of the Bible.

Also remember that I have not accepted the existence of a multiverse. I just accept that the theory seems to stack up. If a better theory comes along I am open to it. The same is not true of religious believers for whom doubting the gospel is a sin.[/quote]

I like your intellectual honesty - its refreshing.

I will disagree with one point though - God never said that we could not question our beliefs - in fact we are encouraged to constantly challenge and test them to see if they are true. It is another classic misconception about God that He is somehow afraid of human questions.

My dad is fond of saying that “did it ever occur to you that nothing ever occurs to God?” It is his way of stating that God welcomes our challenges and questions, and even our anger and frustration.

I fear you have been taught some pretty sad ideas about Christianity. You’ll find the reality is much different than that . . . you’ve accepted some of the worst oversimplifications and mischaracterizations of our beliefs . . that saddens me.[/quote]

Yes and no. There are parts of the bible where god appears open to questioning and there are parts where he goes all smitey on people for daring to doubt his word.

On the whole though it is the Church that is terrified of anyone questioning its tenets, not God and that is an important distinction.[/quote]

Which church is this? A faith not open to scrutiny is not a solid faith.[/quote]

Oh I am not playing that game. Whichever schism of the Church I refer to (and there are thousands) I will just be told that it is not the true faith.

On the whole (and there are notable exceptions) religious leaders don’t like people questioning the tenets of their faith too deeply. Faith in the Christian Church is seen as a desirable quality. Proof denies faith so the search for proof goes against the Church.[/quote]

The Catholic Church proves you wrong. We even hire Devil’s Advocates to demand Proof within the Church. [/quote]

Yes of course, the Catholic Church is exactly who would spring to mind when you are talking about openness.

329

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]
I have read it. I am not impressed. He uses the same logic and exegessis that the word of faith movement uses. If he had an inkling of understanding about the verses he is quoting he would realize what a stupid argument it is.[/quote]OK, I confess I just glanced at it. It looked like a “where are the miracles?” outfit of which it certainly wouldn’t have been the first.
[/quote]

But, honestly, where are they?

There are numerous passages quoted where Jesus explicitly states that, if you have faith, whatever you ask for in prayer will be given to you.

Was he lying? Or is it his policy to only answer prayers that can’t be inarguably attributed to divine intervention?

330

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

I wouldn’t go that far (though I do take your points) I think that the multiverse theory is more rationale than there being a God as described in the bible. I also think that it is more internally consistent than the God of the Bible.

Also remember that I have not accepted the existence of a multiverse. I just accept that the theory seems to stack up. If a better theory comes along I am open to it. The same is not true of religious believers for whom doubting the gospel is a sin.[/quote]

I like your intellectual honesty - its refreshing.

I will disagree with one point though - God never said that we could not question our beliefs - in fact we are encouraged to constantly challenge and test them to see if they are true. It is another classic misconception about God that He is somehow afraid of human questions.

My dad is fond of saying that “did it ever occur to you that nothing ever occurs to God?” It is his way of stating that God welcomes our challenges and questions, and even our anger and frustration.

I fear you have been taught some pretty sad ideas about Christianity. You’ll find the reality is much different than that . . . you’ve accepted some of the worst oversimplifications and mischaracterizations of our beliefs . . that saddens me.[/quote]

Yes and no. There are parts of the bible where god appears open to questioning and there are parts where he goes all smitey on people for daring to doubt his word.

On the whole though it is the Church that is terrified of anyone questioning its tenets, not God and that is an important distinction.[/quote]

Which church is this? A faith not open to scrutiny is not a solid faith.[/quote]

Oh I am not playing that game. Whichever schism of the Church I refer to (and there are thousands) I will just be told that it is not the true faith.

On the whole (and there are notable exceptions) religious leaders don’t like people questioning the tenets of their faith too deeply. Faith in the Christian Church is seen as a desirable quality. Proof denies faith so the search for proof goes against the Church.[/quote]

The Catholic Church proves you wrong. We even hire Devil’s Advocates to demand Proof within the Church. [/quote]

Yes of course, the Catholic Church is exactly who would spring to mind when you are talking about openness.[/quote]

I thought you were talking about scrutiny, now we are talking about openness?

331

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:
Any of you Christians ever read the “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees?” argument?

What are your thoughts on it?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/[/quote]
I have read it. I am not impressed. He uses the same logic and exegessis that the word of faith movement uses. If he had an inkling of understanding about the verses he is quoting he would realize what a stupid argument it is.[/quote]OK, I confess I just glanced at it. It looked like a “where are the miracles?” outfit of which it certainly wouldn’t have been the first.
[/quote]

But, honestly, where are they?

There are numerous passages quoted where Jesus explicitly states that, if you have faith, whatever you ask for in prayer will be given to you.

Was he lying? Or is it his policy to only answer prayers that can’t be inarguably attributed to divine intervention?[/quote]

Do you really think that the audience Jesus was speaking to really thought that if they just believed enough that Christ was a cosmic santa? You are talking about a group of people who spent the last half of their lives in prison, and being beaten.

Those scriptures that he is quoting lack context, purpose, anthropological meaning, as well as any basis for interpretation. As I said in my post he is no better than the word of faith preacher today.
His question while on the surface seems compelling is a trumped up straw man.

That interpretation that he is taking from those verses makes God a servant to us if we will Him hard enough. Which is wrong.

332

I’m not religious myself and perhaps even atheist, but the one requirement I have for living in peace with religious people of all faiths is that each person’s beliefs be respected. And to me, a non-belief is on the same level as a belief.

I find religion to be like language: each is an interpretation of the same concept and one cannot be more right than another. They are different expressions of pretty much the same thing (yes, there are differences, but not enough to invalidate my point).

I’ve only come across a few religious folks (a few Christians and a Muslim couple) who were content with following their religion and having close friends who were agnostic or atheist, without feeling the need to be self righteous and “recruit” these friends. For me, the major reason religion get such a bad reputation is for the self righteousness that tends to come with devout followers.

As long as I can have that respect for my non-belief from a religious friend or colleague or significant other, I can be at peace and there can be peace between us.

333

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I’m not religious myself and perhaps even atheist, but the one requirement I have for living in peace with religious people of all faiths is that each person’s beliefs be respected. And to me, a non-belief is on the same level as a belief.

I find religion to be like language: each is an interpretation of the same concept and one cannot be more right than another. They are different expressions of pretty much the same thing (yes, there are differences, but not enough to invalidate my point).

I’ve only come across a few religious folks (a few Christians and a Muslim couple) who were content with following their religion and having close friends who were agnostic or atheist, without feeling the need to be self righteous and “recruit” these friends. For me, the major reason religion get such a bad reputation is for the self righteousness that tends to come with devout followers.

As long as I can have that respect for my non-belief from a religious friend or colleague or significant other, I can be at peace and there can be peace between us.[/quote]

I give a few apologetic lectures every year, and that is the first point I make. It is an intellectual discussion, but if in the end I can’t walk away with a friend than I have failed.
So I do my best at all times to not let my ego get in the way. In other words I try to let people see the love of Christ through me. I have no doubt I fail more than I care to admit, but your post struck a nerve that is at the heart of all of these topics with me.

334

I always think that the comparison to chimp DNA is the funniest thing ever. Yes, there is a 3% difference. With that 3% difference men have created architecture, art, music, machinery, mathematics, explored the boundaries of space and time, created the smurfs! Thanks God it wasn’t 4 percent or we would be microwaving each other with our brains and shooting anti-matter from our asses.

335

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Yep - God . . . God makes everything and man . . . . man sins (disobeys) . . . man dies (separation from God) and will be separated from God for all of eternity once he physically dies . . . God sends himself as a sacrifice to pay for man’s sins and create His Church (or body) . . . Jesus (God) is resurrected from death to prove that God can save all mankind and has accepted Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins as well give us the Eucharist for the communion of Saints . . . man repents and is baptized to have the sin’s of Adam wiped clean . . . man chooses to place faith in Jesus and do works in the name of the Lord for the atonement of his sins as well as have faith in His Church’s teachings . . . man dies, is resurrected and spends eternity in fellowship with God if he is purified before earthly death, otherwise he goes to purgatory for purification before entering God’s presence in His Kingdom, and Hell in the case of death in Mortal Sin . . . so that all future generations could understand this simple message it is recorded in the inspired word of God as begun by Moses and continued through the Apostles and also in His Church’s Doctrine. . . .

I tried to keep in a few sentences . . . [/quote]

Fixed. ;)[/quote]

and that’s why I am not Catholic . . . .

336

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Yep - God . . . God makes man . . . . man sins (disobeys) . . . man dies (separation from God) and will be separated from God for all of eternity once he physically dies . . . God sends himself as a sacrifice to pay for man’s sins . . . Jesus (God) is resurrected from death to prove that God can save all mankind and has accepted Jesus’s sacrifice for our sins . . . man chooses to place faith in Jesus for the atonement of his sins . . . man dies, is resurrected and spends eternity in fellowship with God . . . so that all future generations could understand this simple message it is recorded in the inspired word of God as begun by moses and continued through the apostles . . . .

I tried to keep in a few sentences . . . [/quote]

…or you could just say: “I don’t know”
[/quote]

But I do know what Christianity is . . . I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here . . .

337

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

What’s pretty funny is that I went in pretty much the opposite direction. Started off as a devout Christian in a Christian family. Studied a lot of science, moved through Gnosticism and Mysticism to Eastern Philosophies. Read a lot about Taoism, still like the philosophy of Taoism though don’t see it as a religion and ended up pretty strongly atheist, but open minded to all possibilities.[/quote]

That is funny. Just goes to show that you at least have an inquisitive mind. :slight_smile:

do you mind if I ask what denomination of Christianity you grew up in?[/quote]

Church of England[/quote]

OOhh . … that does explain a lot.

338

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

Look, you will never see me say there is no god. There could well be a god, I find it unlikely but obviously not impossible. My view is that I am yet to encounter anything that either cannot be explained without recourse to a god or at least has no hint of an explanation that would therefore necessitate a god. Even if I were to encounter something like that, my first recourse would be to assume that either more data or more time to think was needed. The system works perfectly well without a god so why assume a god? [/quote]

Talk to a person who has seen a miracle and you will know someone who has encountered at the very least a god.
[/quote]

OK, give me an example of a miracle then.[/quote]

Typically, G-d uses miracles in Judaism to give a given person the “street credibility” that he is a representative of G-d. Example, Elisha dividing water or Moses turning a rod into a snake, etc.

Modern miracles are often more subtle.

One miracle, to me, at least, has been the continued existance of the Jewish people as a people and the re-assembly of Israel in Israel.

The scattering and near-destruction of my people has been foretold some 3,500 years ago.

Basically every major power has attempted to eliminate us: Babylonians, Pagan Romans, Papal States (with forced conversions and kidnapping of children), various pogroms in Russia, Germany, England, et al, Hitler, Stalin, modern muslim nations.

There is NOTHING special about my people. We are not bigger, stronger, faster, or more numerous.

And yet we remain while most all on that list are nothing but dust.

And not only have we remained, but have somehow managed to be at the turning points of civilization:

from Chris Columbus (yeah, his mother was Jewish, so he’s Jewish),
to Leanardo DaVinci
To ending WWI for England by inventing certain explosives
To ending WWII for the Allies by inventing nukes
To Jonas Salk (vaccines)

Even Christianity (while the theology is certainly disagreed with by Jewish people) follows the core philosophical and ethical guidelines set forth in Judaism (and, more precisely Rabbi Hillel, who first espoused the “Golden Rule — love thy neighbor as thyself” about a century before Christianity came about. (Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is highly derivative of Rabbi Hillel’s teachings.)

Christianity changed the world, generally for the better.

However imperfectly, Judeo-Christian ethics are the ethics of the modern world, or at least the goal.

It staggers me that a completely insignificant semi-migratory tribe from the backwaters of Judea — has played such a vital part in civilization.

There is no rhyme or reason for us to have played the role we have played in the world, but that G-d picked up and decided that he would use this least-of-the-peoples in the world as evidence of Him.

Our existence is a miracle.

And it is also why truly evil people – Hitler, Stalin — seek to destroy Jewish people first, as they are rebelling against G-d Himself.

339

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Wow, I thought Judaism was complex. No clue what any of you are talking about.[/quote]
Have you read the Kabbalah, any of the Midrash or GOOD GRACIOUS HEAVENS MAN, the Talmud? This is Dr. Seuss doctrine were talkin about in this thread. I’m kidding, but not really.
Seriously though, the life and death parts of Christianity can be a expressed in a few sentences, maybe less.

[/quote]

The Talmud (the oral Torah — it was given to Moshe at the same time as the written Pentateuch (the first five books of the Jewish cannon — and I believe also the Christian Bible).

It reads like someone’s class notes from a lecture you did not go to. Difficult and there are conflicting viewpoints without guideance as to which is the correct one.

It really is not meant to be read by non-Jewish persons, and is accordingly opaque.

As a non-Jew, the Jewish belief is you are bound by the 7 Laws of Noah and NOT the entire Law.

While opinions differ, RamBam teaches Christianity is fully compatable with the 7 Laws, and that’s that.

(And no, I am not a Kabbalist. While an modern Orthodox Jew, I am a borderline Karaite. My parents were near-communists who ended up in Israel.)

340

I did a little reading in the Talmud years back and I was quite frankly lost to the point where I remember literally nothing from those readings. I was just pretty much randomly paging through the voluminous set the pastor of my church at that time had. I’m sure that’s not the best method to approach it with anyway. Although that’s definitely a reference work. Nobody just reads something like that.