Does this sum up Christian doctrine?

[Commoner]

Yes.


We, as Christians, believe that we utilize a mythos, using the literary tools of metaphor and allegory, to render a theological understanding of truth. That mythos includes the metaphors of 1) virgin birth, 2) a tree bearing the fruit of knowledge, 3) Wisdom portrayed as the serpent. Further, the fruit wasn't an apple. Additionally, we don't believe that Jesus "had himself tortured and executed." That would be the Romans who did those things.

Need more, Skeezix?

Some christians, that is, while others disagree - or are those "not real Christians"?

 

[sojourner]

You speak for oh so few when you call them metaphors.

You know not whereof you speak. I'd say most Christians understand the metaphoric and mythic nature of many of the texts.

 

[Commoner]

Because "doctrine" denotes a specific belief. None of these things is included in Christian doctrine. Therefore, to answer the OP question: No. This isn't an accurate representation of Christian doctrine.

Further, I don't know any Christians who believe the things mentioned actually, historically happened. Therefore, the generalization that "Christians believe these things" is inaccurate.

Look through this thread again, and you will find a few. Case in point:

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

 

[sojourner]

Some christians, that is, while others disagree - or are those "not real Christians"?

Oh, they're real Christians. But they're real Christians who haven't done their homework. None of this is rocket science.

 

[sojourner]

Look through this thread again, and you will find a few. Case in point:

I don't know him. So far, he's nothing but text on a page.

 

[Photonic]

You know not whereof you speak. I'd say most Christians understand the metaphoric and mythic nature of many of the texts.

No, my childhood was sadly spent joining in with that Christian drivel, they very much buy into it and there are very few things they take for metaphors.

 

[Commoner]

Oh, they're real Christians. But they're real Christians who haven't done their homework. None of this is rocket science.

They probably think something like that about you.

 

[Katzpur]

I can understand you don't agree with the tone - that was most likely the intention, after all, but can you point out a factual error in what he's saying?

Well, let me break the statement down and look at it phrase by phrase.

"the Inventor of the laws of physics and programmer of the NDA code decided to enter the uterus of a Jewish virgin..."

Hmmm. For starters, I don't believe that God entered anybody's uterus.

got himself born...

Uh...no. I don't believe that Mary gave birth to the individual who caused her to become pregnant. She gave birth to His Son.

then deliberately had himself tortured and executed

God the Father was neither tortured nor executed.

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

I'm unaware of anywhere where the Bible suggests that Christ's atoning sacrifice was the result of His Father having exhausted all other options He might have chosen. Furthermore, the issue was never "the theft of an apple" (there is no reference to an apple at all) and Adam and Eve were never accused of theft. They were accused of disobedience. As American writer, H. L. Mencken once observed, "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." It seems Dawkins is a perfect example of the absurdity of trying to simplistically dismantle religious thought.

committed at the instigation of a talking snake.

I suppose there are Christians who believe this. I know I certainly don't. I see "the serpent" as "a sly, sneaking, treacherous person" (which is one of the legitimate definitions my Webster's Unabbridged gives for it).

As Creator of the majestically expanding universe, he not only understands relativistic gravity and quantum mechanics but actually designed them.

Yeah, he got this part right.

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

Good grief, what an idiotic statement.

 

[sojourner]

No, my childhood was sadly spent joining in with that Christian drivel, they very much buy into it and there are very few things they take for metaphors.

How sad for you!

 

[Photonic]

How sad for you!

Very.

 

[sojourner]

They probably think something like that about you.

Probably. But the facts would be on my side.

 

[Katzpur]

And he has a right to after the crimes against humanity the christian creationist have done to our childrens educations.


I cant begin to tell you the twisted brainwashed minds I have to deal with due to bad educations

And you see these comments as even remotely pertaining to my comments which you quoted?

 

[Photonic]

Probably. But the facts would be on my side.

I am seriously skeptical of facts being on the side of any religion. Certainly the facts are on the side of a Christian who doesn't buy into most of the nonsense, however.

 

[Commoner]

Probably. But the facts would be on my side.

Facts? Really? What exactly do you know as a fact regarding the virgin birth? Adam and Eve? Please... bury me in facts.

 

[Adso]

Facts? Really? What exactly do you know as a fact regarding the virgin birth? Adam and Eve? Please... bury me in facts.

I don't understand how you're not getting the idea that these are allegorical literary traditions to explain bigger concepts. Sojourner has explained it pretty clearly that it is not Christian theology to believe these events as literal, but as a form of teaching used in the context of ancient texts. Some people misguidedly do except them as literal, but that's their bag, not Christianity as a whole.

 

[Commoner]

I don't understand how you're not getting the idea that these are allegorical literary traditions to explain bigger concepts. Sojourner has explained it pretty clearly that it is not Christian theology to believe these events as literal, but as a form of teaching used in the context of ancient texts. Some people misguidedly do except them as literal, but that's their bag, not Christianity as a whole.

There is no such thing as "Christianity as a whole". A third of Americans (not even Christians) believe the Bible is to be taken literally (link), it's not just "some people"...

 

[outhouse]

Of course it is. But "Christians" don't do this. Some Christians do this. Don't lump me in with the wacko fundigelicals! I'll be whole trumpet section in the parade decrying Biblical literalism.

I wouldnt lump you in brother, and I have already stated as such.

 

[Commoner]

Well, let me break the statement down and look at it phrase by phrase.

Hmmm. For starters, I don't believe that God entered anybody's uterus.

Uh...no. I don't believe that Mary gave birth to the individual who caused her to become pregnant. She gave birth to His Son.

God the Father was neither tortured nor executed.

I'm unaware of anywhere where the Bible suggests that Christ's atoning sacrifice was the result of His Father having exhausted all other options He might have chosen. Furthermore, the issue was never "the theft of an apple" (there is no reference to an apple at all) and Adam and Eve were never accused of theft. They were accused of disobedience. As American writer, H. L. Mencken once observed, "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." It seems Dawkins is a perfect example of the absurdity of trying to simplistically dismantle religious thought.

I suppose there are Christians who believe this. I know I certainly don't. I see "the serpent" as "a sly, sneaking, treacherous person" (which is one of the legitimate definitions my Webster's Unabbridged gives for it).

Yeah, he got this part right.

Good grief, what an idiotic statement.

That's not really what I was asking. Your particular beliefs, while interesting and perhaps a good subject for discussion, are not what's in question. But, ok - out of curiosity - what about "I and my Father are one." (John 10;30). How do you believe both that Jesus and Jesus' father are one and that what happens to Jesus doesn't happen to Jesus' father? How would you reconcile that?

I mean, one alternative is not to believe "I and my Father are one." But I doubt that's the case here?

 

[Adso]

There is no such thing as "Christianity as a whole".

Yes there is. To be a Christian means you believe Christ died so we may be reconciled with God. That's it. How people interpret and process Christian doctrine to arrive at that point is not that important. I personally believe that they don't understand the framework of the House that well, but at least they found the Door.

A third of Americans (not even Christians) believe the Bible is to be taken literally (link), it's not just "some people"...

First off, that is "some" people. It's not even the majority. You're playing a semantics game. Second, it wouldn't even matter if it was a majority. An idea or theory improperly or less than fully understood by the majority doesn't mean the idea or theory is inaccurate, just misunderstood.

 

[sojourner]

Facts? Really? What exactly do you know as a fact regarding the virgin birth? Adam and Eve? Please... bury me in facts.

Fact: Virgins don't get pregnant. Fact: most ancient stories of god-men begin with a miraculous birth. Fact: The evidence weighs heavily in favor of the virgin birth story being mythic.

Fact: The story of the Fall is borrowed heavily from earlier myth. Fact: the name "Adam" means "human." Fact: Jews (from whom we get the story) don't take it literalistically. Fact: We can correctly utilize literary criticism to show that the elements of the story lie well within the parameters of metaphor. Fact: The evidence weighs heavily in favor of the creation story being mythic.