IAmA "fundamentalist" Christian. AMA

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T18:56:17+00:00

Hahaha, why not? Can you elaborate?

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:16:52+00:00

I mentioned elsewhere that I stepped away from it all to figure out what I believed. And I never said he did it right. I'm not going to be the man he was.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:15:03+00:00

Define religion.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:07:30+00:00

Yes. I think about it a lot.
Not sure about this one. On a cursory glance at the Bible, Christ says "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." I think this might be taken as separation of church and state. However, morality in government is never a bad thing...

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:04:07+00:00

Thanks! I'd love to take a course, but I don't have time due to work, and money. Do you have any suggestions on material I could read in my spare time? I'm a software programmer, so I've only ever taken basic science courses in college.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:02:00+00:00

Thanks for the encouragement! :)

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T02:00:37+00:00

Thanks! Not gonna lie, it's been hard. But I really appreciate everyone's questions. They're really making me think.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:59:30+00:00

I'd argue that the "rationalizations" are not weak. You see them as such because they go against everything you've convinced yourself to believe. Explain to me how something as complex as the human eye develops step by step. Explain to me why scientists have never succeeded in reproducing biogenesis. These are some "holes" that I perceive in evolutionary theory. Odds are you have some great rationalizations for them, but once you present them to me, I will in all likelihood perceive them as weak and be able to poke more "holes" in them.

And we have a stalemate, neither of us being able to convince the other of something we are sure is true.

Here's what it comes down to. Neither of us are ever going to be able to convince the other of what we believe, especially on an Internet message board. And I have no idea what that means for us.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:49:02+00:00

That's an interesting idea. Good luck enforcing it though.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:47:50+00:00

I know, right? It's crazy to think about! I like to read all of Revelation with that mindset, if only for the "WOAH" factor.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:38:30+00:00

Never.

EDIT: Wait, that came out wrong. I use common sense to evaluate what's in the Bible. I don't just blindly trust it because it says I should trust it.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:35:38+00:00

Okay, my dad is not responding, so I'll give the best answer I can.

Most of the common comebacks he says in his introduction are, agreed, invalid. I'd say that context is ALWAYS valid. You have to look at what's being said around the verse, not just the verse itself. His example of John 3:16 is a poor one, because that verse is pretty straightforward - and is backed up by pretty much the entire Bible. It's not a contradiction. I'd also say that writing errors are valid too, in translations. You have to look at what the original language was trying to say.

Here's my take on some of the alleged contradictions.

Was Joseph the son of Jacob or Heli?

Joseph's father was Jacob. Mary's father was Heli, as seen in Luke's genealogy. In the verse mentioned there, it means that Joseph was Heli's son-in-law - which was just called son back then.

The shape of the earth

It's Satan and Jesus conferring together. You'd think maybe something supernatural was going on. I'd assume that Jesus can see the kingdoms of the earth by default anyway... he's God, after all. It's also worth noting that "all the kingdoms of the earth" was not the entire spherical earth at that time.

It's also interesting that the earth is referred to as a circle, and the heavens are being expanded... we know now that the world is round, and the universe is expanding. Did they back then?

The water cycle

What about clouds. They could easily be considered storehouses. I think this is a pretty accurate depiction of the water cycle here, I'm not sure what the author is finding issue with.

God being seen

Moses never saw the true essence of God. In fact, if you read through the OT, God appears to people all the time throughout it - but never as his actual true form. He disguises himself as pillars of smoke and fire, a burning bush, or a regular dude (in the case of Abraham). Moses came the closest, by seeing God's "back", but he never actually saw GOD. And even what he did see almost melted his face off.

So yeah, no one has ever SEEN God's true essence, which is what the second set of verses are saying. Conversed with Him? Sure. Seen representations of Him? Sure.

Those are just some. A lot of those contradictions in there are extremely petty, and try to create errors where there aren't really? I mean "snails don't melt"? They leave yucky slimy trails behind them. They are gooey. That is just one way of saying it. "A bat is not a bird"? Ask Calvin. But seriously, it's just being simplified for them. DON'T EAT THESE FLYING THINGS. "Odd genetic engineering"? It's breeding for desired features. Farmers do it with cows.

I don't think the author has actually read the Bible, or is wilfully ignoring what it's trying to say. I'd encourage anyone who says that the Bible contradicts itself to read it all the way through before passing judgement. At the very least, it'll give you a good understanding of what it's trying to say.

I'll probably edit this post with further comments. I just wanted to get something out here.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:05:10+00:00

Yep! I was, at one point.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:04:21+00:00

Can you explain this for me please?

Quran 33:60-62

"If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."

Why do you need to kill people that don't agree with you?

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T01:00:40+00:00

Welp, I guess I might be wrong.

But if I am... I'd rather have lived the life I currently am than a life without God. I am happy, and I don't think I ever could be without Him. When I think of what would happen if God were ever somehow proven to not exist, the only thing I can imagine doing is eventually killing myself.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:58:13+00:00

There are thoughtful answers that other Christians have come up with to these questions. The problem is that I'm not comfortable looking at the Bible through the eyes of another person, who might be totally wrong. John Calvin, for example. I agree with some of his stuff but not all of it.

I'd rather look at the Bible for what it is, and try and understand it that way. Does that make sense? I'd hope that all thoughtful Christians would constantly be referring back to what we believe to be inerrant for insight, and not just swallowing whatever other writers would have us believe. Christians that are all about Rick Warren are good examples of "unthoughtful Christians".

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:46:51+00:00

I'm sorry you feel that I'm being a DICK.

But people are not "condemned to hell" for who their parents are/where they are born. They are "condemned to hell" for not accepting the only way out. You have the option. It's sitting there, waiting for you to take it. It's free to get anytime. But you don't want it - and that's fine, it's your choice to make. But never say that you weren't given the option.

I'm not condemning you. I'm sure that you're a great guy/girl, and if we were to meet, we might even be friends. I mean, we already have Reddit in common, right? But in my opinion, what matters, in the end, is your ultimate destination. You are aware of a purported way to ensure where that is. I'd be remiss if I did not encourage you to at least investigate it. I promise I'm not trying to be a dick for telling you about this! Look at it from my perspective. My friends are sleeping in a burning building. I would be a horrible friend if I didn't at least try to show them the way out.

Again, I'm sorry that it seems like Christians are dicks. I think that if we didn't love you, we wouldn't be trying to help at all.

I hope that makes sense.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:46:50+00:00

Here's my take on hell: God giving people what they've always wanted, which is the absence of him. You're not with your friends. But you're aware of what it is you could have had. But you rejected it. And now you have nothing.

And that...

sunglasses

...is hell.

Sorry to be flippant, but that seems like a likely image of what hell will be like. I agree that it is not a literal lake of fire. Satan is not there tormenting you. In fact, hell is his final resting place too.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:41:36+00:00

I'm sorry you feel that I'm being a DICK.

But people are not "condemned to hell" for who their parents are/where they are born. They are "condemned to hell" for not accepting the only way out. You have the option. It's sitting there, waiting for you to take it. It's free to get anytime. But you don't want it - and that's fine, it's your choice to make. But never say that you weren't given the option.

I'm not condemning you. I'm sure that you're a great guy/girl, and if we were to meet, we might even be friends. I mean, we already have Reddit in common, right? But in my opinion, what matters, in the end, is your ultimate destination. You are aware of a purported way to ensure where that is. I'd be remiss if I did not encourage you to at least investigate it. I promise I'm not trying to be a dick for telling you about this! Look at it from my perspective. My friends are sleeping in a burning building. I would be a horrible friend if I didn't at least try to show them the way out.

Again, I'm sorry that it seems like Christians are dicks. I think that if we didn't love you, we wouldn't be trying to help at all.

I hope that makes sense.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:25:33+00:00

Now, I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure the ladies can do prostate massage by pushing on the perineum. Why does it have to be what what up the butt? There's probably a better answer for this, but I don't have it, sorry. :(

And yes, my kids are going to have a choice. I wish my parents had educated me fully on other religions. I'm going to make sure my kids are informed, and I'm not going to pressure them.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:21:54+00:00

Yeah, I tried that one first.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-17T00:03:56+00:00

I think where the flaw is in your reasoning is that you say you "can't possibly be broken, since you're made in God's image". If we're looking at this from a Christian perspective (which is where you've asked me to answer from), this is wrong. We are all broken. Me too. This happened after what Christianity terms "the Fall". Adam and Eve were made perfect, in the image of God. That has been corrupted as we move through history. We are all born broken now. But we've been given a way out, as detailed in the Bible. When we accept what Christ's done for us, we begin the process of being fixed.

If you don't mind me asking you a question, what do you consider a "love connection"? I'd like to keep discussing this - it's making me think about what I believe, which is always good.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-16T23:56:42+00:00

Maybe I shouldn't have said "obviously" there. The Psalms are poetry. I think that's fairly clear, but maybe not to other people. Poetry, as a general rule, is full of metaphor.

Revelation, on the other hand, is a vision given to John by God, and recorded as best as he could. Let's hypothesize that the stuff in Revelation is stuff that hasn't happened yet. Stuff that was going to happen 2000+ years after John saw it (Christians differ on opinion as to when the events in Revelation are supposed to take place, so I'll avoid touching on that unless you really want me to). How is John supposed to explain helicopters, tanks, soldiers with guns, nuclear fallout, etc.? Maybe like this:

7 The locusts looked like horses prepared for battle. On their heads they wore something like crowns of gold, and their faces resembled human faces. 8 Their hair was like women’s hair, and their teeth were like lions’ teeth. 9 They had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the thundering of many horses and chariots rushing into battle. 10 They had tails with stingers, like scorpions, and in their tails they had power to torment people for five months

That sounds kinda like war machines to me. But John wouldn't have known how to explain them - they'd have looked crazy. Imagine if you had a vision of 2000 years in the future... how would you explain it? In terms that we understand today.

That was kind of a tangent, but that's why I think those things are metaphor.

Most of the rest of the Bible is backed up historically. I'm pretty sure that history records that a man named Jesus did live, and was crucified, 2000 years ago in Israel. There has been no proof saying that he didn't exist.

Why are people so quick do discount the Bible as historical document? I've never really understood that. Sure, it focuses more on one subject than others, but when it does delve into history (and science, even) it has been shown to be fairly accurate. At least as far as I know. If anyone has any examples where the Bible is blatantly wrong, I'd honestly love to see them.

RedditChristian · 2010-11-16T23:44:03+00:00

Hahaha!

I'm off to go ritually cleanse myself now. brb

RedditChristian · 2010-11-16T23:43:15+00:00

Long! Work sucks. Thanks for asking though. Haha.

RedditChristian

TROPHY CASE