Does this sum up Christian doctrine?

[charles brough]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

 

[Adso]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake.

Aside from the ridiculous mocking tone, that's a pretty terrible summation of Christian theology.

As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

...Says the biologist who now spends his days and energy attacking the personal beliefs and lifestyles of individuals instead of something worthwhile.

 

[Commoner]

Aside from the ridiculous mocking tone, that's a pretty terrible summation of Christian theology.

But to be fair, Christian theology is pretty terrible...

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I heard a pastor say once that it's the strict sexual requirements that keep most non-believers away from church. I notice the OP's focus on the sexual stuff as some of the main objections to the faith: "Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I heard a pastor say once that it's the strict sexual requirements that keep most non-believers away from church. I notice the OP's focus on the sexual stuff as some of the main objections to the faith: "Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

I think it depends.

There aren't many churches around me that deny evolution or do other things that are really bizarre, so these sorts of moral issues are the ones where I get the clearest sense that the churches in question are on the wrong side (as I view it).

Edit: but it's not a matter of not wanting my own sexual freedom limited. I'm happily married to a member of the opposite sex in a first marriage for both of us, and I have no desire to procure an abortion, commit adultery, or commit any other sexual "sin" that these churches generally say people shouldn't do. These policies repel me because I think it's wrong to require them of people, not because I wouldn't be able to follow them myself. I'd have no problem fitting my own lifestyle into the beliefs of any mainstream (or even conservative) Christian church; I just don't want to be seen as supporting these things as requirements for everyone.

However, I know of a fair number of churches where abortion and same-sex marriage are okay and they're much more concerned with helping the world than policing other members' "sins", but these places still don't attract me.

Actually, something occurs to me: the churches that are against things like abortion and same-sex marriage also have other beliefs that I find objectionable: a big emphasis on atonement theology or a literal Hell, for instance.

 

[Quagmire]

But to be fair, Christian theology is pretty terrible...

How is that fair? And what do you mean specifically?

 

[Commoner]

How is that fair? And what do you mean specifically?

Oh, you mean I should address a statement that offers no substance other than characterizing someone else's statement as "a pretty terrible summation" of something with due consideration and provide specific examples of my counterposition instead of merely pointing out its lack of substance in an attempt at irony?

I could indeed give specific examples of terrible, gruesome accounts of stonings, ritual sacrifices, genocide, sexual depravity and other examples in the sacred texts of Christianity, but I think we're all very well aware of them, so why bore everybody?

 

[Adso]

Oh, you mean I should address a statement that offers no substance other than characterizing someone else's statement as "a pretty terrible summation" of something with due consideration and provide specific examples of my counterposition instead of merely pointing out its lack of substance in an attempt at irony?

Dude, that's exactly what I did with my original post. If somebody presents a complex, multifaceted concept in a childish, mocking tone, and then asks me to address it, why should I waste energy trying to argue with someone who presents (and agrees) with a deeply flawed perception of even the basic tenets?

If Mr. Brough asks me in what way it's a terrible summary, I'll gladly answer more in depth.

I could indeed give specific examples of terrible, gruesome accounts of stonings, ritual sacrifices, genocide, sexual depravity and other examples in the sacred texts of Christianity, but I think we're all very well aware of them, so why bore everybody?

The topic at hand is Christian theology, not the actions of individuals or tribes.

 

[lunamoth]

One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” 29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.[e] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[f] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[g] There is no commandment greater than these.”


- Mark 12

 

[Mister Emu]

deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple

This is a shallow understanding of atonement and reconciliation. God became man to bridge the gap, that humanity created, between us. The God of life took the punishment of death undeserved and in this conquered death, coming back and blazing the trail of resurrection for mankind. He became man and provided a purified nature that man might partake in. He came to heal, and became our spiritual medicine.

he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple

Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry.

You tend to spend more attention on the things that go wrong as opposed to those that are working in good order. That doesn't mean God only "really" cares about sin, but that is where we are going wrong.

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Take anything said by a vitriolic non-believer about a faith with a grain of salt.

 

[Commoner]

Dude, that's exactly what I did with my original post. If somebody presents a complex, multifaceted concept in a childish, mocking tone, and then asks me to address it, why should I waste energy trying to argue with someone who presents (and agrees) with a deeply flawed perception of even the basic tenets?

If Mr. Brough asks me in what way it's a terrible summary, I'll gladly answer more in depth.

Perhaps you missed the question in the OP...

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?
...snip...

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

The topic at hand is Christian theology, not the actions of individuals or tribes.

I don't know in what way you think those aren't a part of Christian theology - but OK, if you need a more god-specific example, how about killing basically all of humanity, as well as most animals, in a flood? I mean, if you're not happy with this one, I could produce a list (though not an exhaustive one) - but again, why bore you with things you already know?

 

[Commoner]

This is a shallow understanding of atonement and reconciliation. God became man to bridge the gap, that humanity created, between us. The God of life took the punishment of death undeserved and in this conquered death, coming back and blazing the trail of resurrection for mankind. He became man and provided a purified nature that man might partake in. He came to heal, and became our spiritual medicine.

What exactly is "the punishment of death" in a worldview that includes an afterlife - and what does it mean for a pressumably immortal being? I mean, what is the actual "sacrifice" here, if you don't mind me asking? Getting tortured and "killed"? For whom is this a sacrifice if it is god that requires it and god that makes it? And what exactly necessitates this sacrifice? By what mechanism does this sacrifice achieve "bridging the gap" or whatever end it is supposed to be a means to?

You know they say about quantum mechanics that whoever claims to really understand it...doesn't. I think we might be dealing with a similar phenomenon when it comes to this doctrine - although, I would propose, for a slightly different reason.

 

[ChristineES]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

No, not exactly. Maybe some of you guys would like to remember that Christians, like I am, are people who also have feelings, too. I don't believe that my faith's theology is terrible, I am not violent. I don't condemn anyone to "hell" (I don't believe it to be a literal place, anyway), and I try and love every person (it is easy most of the time, but once in a while a little more difficult).
I don't hate Mr. Dawkins, but I wish he would just be an atheist without mocking we religious folks. He can still talk about the subject without the mocking. I am sure if I and other religious folks were to mock him, he'd either laugh at us for being stupid or he may actually not like it (but in reality, I really wouldn't know what he would since I don't know him).

By the way, I am not offended at all. I would have to be offended 24 and 7 if I was offended by all the mocking of my faith, and I don't have time for that.
God bless.

 

[Mister Emu]

What exactly is "the punishment of death" in a worldview that includes an afterlife

Dying. I presume a priori that not dying is better than dying. Even with a light at the end of the tunnel as it were.

I mean, what is the actual "sacrifice" here, if you don't mind me asking? Getting tortured and "killed"? For whom is this a sacrifice if it is god that requires it and god that makes it? And what exactly necessitates this sacrifice? By what mechanism does this sacrifice achieve "bridging the gap" or whatever end it is supposed to be a means to?

I don't believe the word sacrifice appeared in my post...

I think we might be dealing with a similar phenomenon when it comes to this doctrine - although, I would propose, for a slightly different reason.

It is a mystery, or at least has mysterious parts of it, I won't deny that...

 

[Commoner]

Dying. I presume a priori that not dying is better than dying. Even with a light at the end of the tunnel as it were.

Why? Doesn't it simply mean going from this life to the next (and then back, if you're Jesus/God/"The one")? What is it actually about dying that is akin to a punishment, especially if it's reversible? Can you pinpoint the "bad thing" about it?

I mean, I can - but then again, I have a completely different perspective to yours.

I don't believe the word sacrifice appeared in my post...

I simply used "sacrifice" as a shorthand for "he took the punishement...undeserved". Is it not the case that you believe this was Jesus' or God's sacrifice? I thought this to be a pretty uncontraversial point? But, whatever word you want to use (perhaps punishment?) for what happened - my questions/objections still stand, I'm sure you won't just dodge them.

It is a mystery, or at least has mysterious parts of it, I won't deny that...

Well, it's mysterious insomuch as you make it mysterious. Why insist on these elaborate explanations if there seem to be pieces missing that would make a coherent whole?

 

[Muffled]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

I believe it. Try snuggling up to your cold hard physics book someday. Love is not material.

 

[Commoner]

I believe it. Try snuggling up to your cold hard physics book someday. Love is not material.

There you go, he believes it... Thanks for being honest.

 

[Father Heathen]

Dawkins says Christians believe this? Is he right?

The famous Richard Dawkins describes Christians as ones who believe that "the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin, got himself born, then deliberately had himself tortured and executed because he couldn't think of a better way to forgive the theft of an apple, committed at the instigation of a talking snake. As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them. Yet when he really cares about is "sin," abortion, how often you go to church and whether gay people should marry."

It seems to sum up the whole way Christianity and Intelligent Design theory come together.

Who believes it and who does not---and why?

I thought his summary raised some good points.

 

[Father Heathen]

I believe it. Try snuggling up to your cold hard physics book someday. Love is not material.

Love isn't nonsensical mythology, either.

 

[Father Heathen]

I am sure if I and other religious folks were to mock him, he'd either laugh at us for being stupid or he may actually not like it (but in reality, I really wouldn't know what he would since I don't know him).

[youtube]-ZuowNcuGsc[/youtube]
Hate E-mails with Richard Dawkins - YouTube