Just some questions/thoughts.

[AlexWylde]

I guess you could say I'm a recent "convert" to "Christianity". I was raised in a Mormon family, went through some bouts with atheism, and after much thought, and a few experiences, have found that I believe in Jesus Christ (not that Mormon's don't believe in Jesus Christ, but I'm not Mormon). The thing is, even though I accept Jesus as my savior, I think my beliefs are a lot different than that of "mainstream" Christianity. But, I don't know exactly what is widely accepted, so I thought I'd come here and just see what some of you think.

I'm a very logical and philosophical person. I have a firm belief in the sciences and believe in God's omnipresence. I DO believe that the earth is 4 billion years old, and also believe in, to some extent, evolution. I think the scientific evidence for these things is quite overwhelming, and I don't believe that God put the evidence there just as a test of faith. I don't believe that God is deceitful. So... with these things in mind, I obviously don't believe in a strict interpretation of the Genesis creation, or even the story of Noah. I guess one of my questions is, how many Christians share these same sentiments? I'm also afraid that a lot of Christians wouldn't consider me Christian for believing those things.

I believe that the Bible has some error. I mean, it's been translated, altered, compiled, recompiled, and just messed with for at least the past 2000 years. Now, I think all the stories and lessons are applicable to our lives, but not everything is meant to be taken literally. Isn't the most important thing that I take the MEANING of the lessons and apply them? Is it REALLY that important to other Christians (or God for that matter) whether or not I take a lot of passages to be literal? I just don't believe that eternal damnation/eternal life is going to hinge on which passages I take to be metaphorical or which ones I take to be literal. Isn't the most important thing that I accept Jesus Christ and live a life pleasing to him?

I guess I'll just say that for now. There's a lot more on my mind, but I just want to hear from some of you what your thoughts are.
Thanks.

 

[blackout]

I say believe what seems right to you,
and who cares what anyone else says/thinks about it.

"Christian" like anything else is only a label.
Why be concerned about the label then?
Just be you, and believe whatever it is that fits
with your thinking/perception/experience.

And welcome to RF.

 

[blackout]

Alex,

I JUST noticed that your post is in the "Christianity" forum.
If you feel my post was innapropriate, and you want me to take it down,
I will not be offended in any way. It was my mistake.

~Violet~

 

[AlexWylde]

Violet,
No no no. I appreciate your input. Just because you're not "Christian" doesn't mean that you can't contribute to my quest for truth. I very much respect your point of view and am glad you took the time to reply.

 

[Master Vigil]

Welcome to the boat my friend. I share all of what you have typed above. Especially about the literalness of the bible, especially the old testament.

 

[Charity]

Welcome to RF....glad you decided to join us.....I probably have a few different views than you, I hope we can be friends anyway. I feel that everyone has to work out their own walk with God....Sometimes we may not agree but we can still discuss and respect each other....Just go with what you feel is right for you.

Peace
Charity

 

[Jehovah's Witness]

I have a question, just to help you reason with yourself, you said that you don't believe in the story of Noah, but if you are becoming christian, consider this...

Christians obviously follow Christ/Jesus, in Mathews 24:3, 36-42(the whole chapter is good, it reveals much fulfilling bible prophecy) it is Jesus speaking to his disciples in verse 3 they ask him, "When will this all happen, and what will be the signal of your presence and the conclusion of this system of things?" he answers through out the whole chapter but in verse 36-42 he refers to Noah in his days, and the parallel between Noah's Days and our days. If Noah wouldn't of existed then why would have Jesus mentioned it?

You also mentioned about evolution, when the Bible states that God created Adam and Eve in Genesis, once again Jesus refered to that account in Mathews 19:5, my point is if you don't believe in all these accounts, you don't believe what Jesus taught. I used to be like you exactly didn't believe these "corny stories" but after studying all the bible, I noticed that the Greek Scriptures throw some insight on the Hebrew Scriptures, thus revealing that they are true, if the Saints: Peter, Paul, John and Jesus himself mentioned them to strenghten up their teachings by using example from the old testament...if these accounts were false, there teachings would have been in vague, you think about that...

 

[AlexWylde]

Jehovah's Witness,

I suppose you have some pretty good points. I do not know many things at the moment, but I guess that doesn't keep me from speculating and searching for the truth. I read those passages. One possible way to understand the passage about the Noah (not that I necessarily believe this, but just a possibility) is that Jesus was simply referring to the story of Noah to provide a referential example as to what will happen. People refer to fictional stories all the time to provide examples that make things that are very real, easier to understand. As for the other passage, I don't think that it necessarily contradicts any evolutionary viewpoint. It refers to "them" and "the beginning", but these terms could be relative.

I'm not preaching or saying I'm right. I'm just here to discuss.

 

[d3vaLL]

You are riding a slippery slope. In my experience, I find that anyone working through for meaning and understanding in life will find themselves closer and closer to peace. Good for you. I suppose something that once bothered me is: If you can decide that Noah's story is fiction, then can you decide if Jesus' story is fiction? What motivates your conversion; reward or resonance?

 

[Jeremy Mason]

I guess you could say I'm a recent "convert" to "Christianity". I was raised in a Mormon family, went through some bouts with atheism, and after much thought, and a few experiences, have found that I believe in Jesus Christ (not that Mormon's don't believe in Jesus Christ, but I'm not Mormon). The thing is, even though I accept Jesus as my savior, I think my beliefs are a lot different than that of "mainstream" Christianity. But, I don't know exactly what is widely accepted, so I thought I'd come here and just see what some of you think.

I'm a very logical and philosophical person. I have a firm belief in the sciences and believe in God's omnipresence. I DO believe that the earth is 4 billion years old, and also believe in, to some extent, evolution. I think the scientific evidence for these things is quite overwhelming, and I don't believe that God put the evidence there just as a test of faith. I don't believe that God is deceitful. So... with these things in mind, I obviously don't believe in a strict interpretation of the Genesis creation, or even the story of Noah. I guess one of my questions is, how many Christians share these same sentiments? I'm also afraid that a lot of Christians wouldn't consider me Christian for believing those things.

I believe that the Bible has some error. I mean, it's been translated, altered, compiled, recompiled, and just messed with for at least the past 2000 years. Now, I think all the stories and lessons are applicable to our lives, but not everything is meant to be taken literally. Isn't the most important thing that I take the MEANING of the lessons and apply them? Is it REALLY that important to other Christians (or God for that matter) whether or not I take a lot of passages to be literal? I just don't believe that eternal damnation/eternal life is going to hinge on which passages I take to be metaphorical or which ones I take to be literal. Isn't the most important thing that I accept Jesus Christ and live a life pleasing to him?

I guess I'll just say that for now. There's a lot more on my mind, but I just want to hear from some of you what your thoughts are.
Thanks.

I never was a Mormon, but understand and agree with your position. I don't go to church and feel that RF provides me with the fellowship of Christians and non-Christians in a meaningful and educational way. Plus, I find the sharing of information to be more beneficial and satisfying than just hearing a sermon every Sunday. However, I don't want to discourage you from going to church. Using both IMO would be the logical solution. Anyway, welcome and have fun sharing your POV with others.

 

[sojourner]

my point is if you don't believe in all these accounts, you don't believe what Jesus taught.

This is a patently untrue statement. A literal interpretation is not necessary in order to embrace fully that which is not stated literally.

 

[sojourner]

I guess you could say I'm a recent "convert" to "Christianity". I was raised in a Mormon family, went through some bouts with atheism, and after much thought, and a few experiences, have found that I believe in Jesus Christ (not that Mormon's don't believe in Jesus Christ, but I'm not Mormon). The thing is, even though I accept Jesus as my savior, I think my beliefs are a lot different than that of "mainstream" Christianity. But, I don't know exactly what is widely accepted, so I thought I'd come here and just see what some of you think.

I'm a very logical and philosophical person. I have a firm belief in the sciences and believe in God's omnipresence. I DO believe that the earth is 4 billion years old, and also believe in, to some extent, evolution. I think the scientific evidence for these things is quite overwhelming, and I don't believe that God put the evidence there just as a test of faith. I don't believe that God is deceitful. So... with these things in mind, I obviously don't believe in a strict interpretation of the Genesis creation, or even the story of Noah. I guess one of my questions is, how many Christians share these same sentiments? I'm also afraid that a lot of Christians wouldn't consider me Christian for believing those things.

I believe that the Bible has some error. I mean, it's been translated, altered, compiled, recompiled, and just messed with for at least the past 2000 years. Now, I think all the stories and lessons are applicable to our lives, but not everything is meant to be taken literally. Isn't the most important thing that I take the MEANING of the lessons and apply them? Is it REALLY that important to other Christians (or God for that matter) whether or not I take a lot of passages to be literal? I just don't believe that eternal damnation/eternal life is going to hinge on which passages I take to be metaphorical or which ones I take to be literal. Isn't the most important thing that I accept Jesus Christ and live a life pleasing to him?

I guess I'll just say that for now. There's a lot more on my mind, but I just want to hear from some of you what your thoughts are.
Thanks.

You'll find a lot of company here in mainstream Christianity.

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

Accepting evolution as a biological fact is not atypical for Christians. Large mainstream denominations, both liberal and conservative, have acknowledged its reality.

As for the Scriptures, the term "inspiration" is wide enough to steer a truck through. Different groups of Christians argue on this point. Personally, I would say where the Bible teaches us a truth of doctrine it does not err. That statement itself is simplified and therefore quite problematic.

You do not seem to be on peripheral at all.

 

[AlexWylde]

But correct me if I'm wrong. "Mainstream" Christianity believes these things:

-God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = same thing
-The Bible is infallible

I'm also curious as to which version of the Bible most people use. For me, since I speak English, and I don't trust the likes of some priest/pastor with an agenda to tell me how to interpret something, then I would want the earliest English translation. I think the closest thing I can get to the original is the King James Version. Are there some Christian circles that would consider my rationale errant? And that if I don't read their version of the Bible, then I haven't been saved?

 

[Starfish]

I agree with much of what you wrote.

 

[Dunemeister]

-God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = same thing

As with most Christian doctrines, the doctrine of the Trinity suffers from sloganeering. Let's just say that your slogan is true as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. If you're new to the faith, I suggest that you take in some catechism classes so you can get educated in the basics such as the Christian doctrine of God.

-The Bible is infallible

Mainstream Christians frequently believe this, but you don't HAVE to believe this in order to be within the pale of orthodoxy. I'm orthodox, but I don't believe the bible is infallible.

I'm also curious as to which version of the Bible most people use. For me, since I speak English, and I don't trust the likes of some priest/pastor with an agenda to tell me how to interpret something, then I would want the earliest English translation. I think the closest thing I can get to the original is the King James Version. Are there some Christian circles that would consider my rationale errant? And that if I don't read their version of the Bible, then I haven't been saved?

The bible you read will not determine whether you are saved. Your faith in Jesus saves you, period.

The KJV, even when it was completed, was not the best translation available. Older doesn't equal better. I use the NRSV, but I've found it helpful to have several English translations in my library. That way, I can compare how different translation committees have rendered certain problematic passages.

Lastly, you MUST NOT restrict your study of Christianity to the scriptures. They're important, even decisive. But the interpretation of scripture is not a mere private matter. That's how heresies start. So along with scripture, begin to interact with tradition as well.

 

[tomspug]

I guess you could say I'm a recent "convert" to "Christianity". I was raised in a Mormon family, went through some bouts with atheism, and after much thought, and a few experiences, have found that I believe in Jesus Christ (not that Mormon's don't believe in Jesus Christ, but I'm not Mormon). The thing is, even though I accept Jesus as my savior, I think my beliefs are a lot different than that of "mainstream" Christianity. But, I don't know exactly what is widely accepted, so I thought I'd come here and just see what some of you think.

I'm a very logical and philosophical person. I have a firm belief in the sciences and believe in God's omnipresence. I DO believe that the earth is 4 billion years old, and also believe in, to some extent, evolution. I think the scientific evidence for these things is quite overwhelming, and I don't believe that God put the evidence there just as a test of faith. I don't believe that God is deceitful. So... with these things in mind, I obviously don't believe in a strict interpretation of the Genesis creation, or even the story of Noah. I guess one of my questions is, how many Christians share these same sentiments? I'm also afraid that a lot of Christians wouldn't consider me Christian for believing those things.

I believe that the Bible has some error. I mean, it's been translated, altered, compiled, recompiled, and just messed with for at least the past 2000 years. Now, I think all the stories and lessons are applicable to our lives, but not everything is meant to be taken literally. Isn't the most important thing that I take the MEANING of the lessons and apply them? Is it REALLY that important to other Christians (or God for that matter) whether or not I take a lot of passages to be literal? I just don't believe that eternal damnation/eternal life is going to hinge on which passages I take to be metaphorical or which ones I take to be literal. Isn't the most important thing that I accept Jesus Christ and live a life pleasing to him?

I guess I'll just say that for now. There's a lot more on my mind, but I just want to hear from some of you what your thoughts are.
Thanks.

You sound like an awesome guy. Can't wait to get to know you better!

I agree with what you say about taking the Bible literally, especially when context isn't taken into consideration. I try to keep my opinions about science, history, and the Bible limited to my own knowledge and experience. If I feel compelled to learn more, I'll probably develop more of an opinion about it.

Seems as though clinging to truth is really the best way to find it. Look for it everywhere, not just where you expect to find it.

 

[tomspug]

But correct me if I'm wrong. "Mainstream" Christianity believes these things:

-God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = same thing
-The Bible is infallible

I'm also curious as to which version of the Bible most people use. For me, since I speak English, and I don't trust the likes of some priest/pastor with an agenda to tell me how to interpret something, then I would want the earliest English translation. I think the closest thing I can get to the original is the King James Version. Are there some Christian circles that would consider my rationale errant? And that if I don't read their version of the Bible, then I haven't been saved?

I would consider that errant. Just because something is the earliest English translation doesn't make it the best. Most Biblical scholars study the earliest form of the New Testament we have: the Greek, and the earliest form of the Old Testament we have: the Hebrew. The most widely used translations are the New King James and the New International Version, which constantly take the original writings into account.

 

[Snow_Owl]

AlexWylde,

You sound a lot like me with your interpetation of things. I for one do not read most of the Bible literally and spend a lot of my time trying to determine what passages really mean. I, for one, enjoy studying the sciences and will probably major in Chemistry when I go to college, I still have a year to decide. I was raised Catholic and eventually left the Catholic church because I didn't feel comfortable with their ways. I have been a "christian" my whole life but I do not currently belong to a church, I don't find anything wrong not being part of one. It's nice, mind you, to have that sort of fellowship and community but it takes time to find somewhere you are really comfortable with. I don't take anything people say at face value, one of the biggest ways I have grown in my faith is by asking questions and challenging the norm, some people don't like this but this is how i approach life. That's why I gave myself the title "Fringe Christian" because I try to keep out of the theology and politics and remember that JESUS IS MY LORD AND SAVIOR and I try to live by his word.

As far as Bibles, well I don't quite have the answer to that one I still don't know for myself heheh. I started collecting Bibles to compare differences just by reading these are some of the inferences I've made: The NIV (New International Version) is pretty easy to read and widely accepted but it was written in the 70s which is too close to modern times for my liking, politically. I like the NRSV (New Standard Revised Version) because it has a more "open minded" sense of writing by changing things that could just by default be "he" to "he or she/they" if there is no definate answer, some people find this too liberal. KJV (King James Version) is considered "reliable" only because the political climate at the time of publishing (1611) doesn't have a lot of relevance now, but being a teenager not well educated in middle english, I find it really difficult to read and understand to its fullest extent. There are others that I havn't tried yet like the NKJV (New King James Version) which is supposed to be just modernized reading of the original KJV. There are also many other Bible versions out there. My advice is get some, they are usually cheap depending on where you go and sometimes you can get them for free if you know where to look. You may also want a study Bible and I use the "Life Application Study Bible" that my Dad got me for easter. The scripture is NIV but it has hundreds of pages of good information to read and learn about.


People, sometimes even other Christians, will be quick to challenge what you believe in so hold fast to what you believe. I'll pray for you on your walk with Christ.

 

[Lucian]

But correct me if I'm wrong. "Mainstream" Christianity believes these things:

-God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = same thing
-The Bible is infallible

I'm also curious as to which version of the Bible most people use. For me, since I speak English, and I don't trust the likes of some priest/pastor with an agenda to tell me how to interpret something, then I would want the earliest English translation. I think the closest thing I can get to the original is the King James Version. Are there some Christian circles that would consider my rationale errant? And that if I don't read their version of the Bible, then I haven't been saved?

If that's what the mainstream believe then I don't suggest going with the mainstream. God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not the same thing at all and the Bible is not infallible. What is true can certainly be found there but that doesn't make the collection of books infallible.

Also, the earliest in English is certainly not the best. KJV is probably the worst I have seen. I suggest modern critical editions which include other options for certain verses, or if you have any knowledge of Greek, go to the sources. If you also know other strange languages, such as Latin, Gothic or Aramaic, I suggest comparing the early versions in those languages with the Greek. Of Greek, Nestle-Aland is interesting, same with the Septuagint.

The only English Bible I own is ironically the KJV, as if I have need of passages translated in English, I look them up from the internet or translate them myself. Otherwise I look them up in my language, and check with the Greek if there's uncertainties.