God's Not Dead

[Dreaded_Desire62]

Well, in order to interpret scriptures accurately, it is imperative to weigh your pastors interpretations with your own understandings, you also want to make sure your theology checks out. Whether that means discussions with others who share similar beliefs and what not. It's hard to explain, but as long as core theologies check out, minor interpretations don't matter too much. I enjoy debating interpretations on a smaller scale. As long as important theologies aren't being disagreed upon everything is good.




Well, there is a way to have an extremely solid, and fairly accurate interpretation of theology. Your theology between verses must line up across the entirety of the Bible.



Well I don't completely disagree with you, I suppose it's important to not go wrong on big theology issues, as I've said earlier in this post. I think we have reached a more or less reasonable agreement to agree and disagree.

I honestly don't care what the Bible says. I make my own decisions.

 

[Nutari]

I honestly don't care what the Bible says. I make my own decisions.

Well, that's fine to believe, but you haven't really added to the discussion. I'm sorry but I also don't really appreciate the fact that you engaged with me, as I spent a lot of time trying to thoughtfully answer your questions so we could have a really good discussion, and then you just drop out of it by saying that. I'm not mad, but I feel let down because I really wanted to know views. But whatever, thanks for at engaging as much as you did.

 

[Nyangoro]

Just because people have PhDs in the subject doesn't mean that there's always a clear answer. Take literal vs metaphorical interpretation, for instance. This is a huge issue. What's meant to be taken literally? What's meant to be taken figuratively? Often times, it seems that things are taken literally up until such a perspective doesn't match close enough to modern understanding, when the metaphorical interpretation takes precedence.

I mean, even in the realm of science, which prides itself on a level of empiricism beyond that of most subjects, it isn't uncommon to find the top minds of any given field arguing over a collection of prominent theories. If even they are plagued by a certain degree of uncertainty, I can't imagine that religious studies are any more clear cut.

 

[misssheep]

1. Would you necessarily believe him about Jesus and Yahweh or not?

2. Would you side with the teacher?
3. Do you think that both of them seem a bit hostile in their pursuits? If so, who is more judgmental?

1 : Who's him ? What do you mean by him ? Do you mean the student or the Professor ? Student, yes because I'm Christian, the Professor however, no. The Professor could jump about and spew that God is Dead all he wants, he doesn't make the truth. Plus it's a hole in his statement, because you have to believe in something in order for it to be alive or dead. So, he's a silly Professor. If he didn't have some sort of faith in God, he would of worded his statement as " God is not real " instead of " God is Dead "

2 : No, plus he stinks as a Professor.

3 : A little yes, one is clearly hurt or upset by God most likely due to a rough past and his trust in God has been ruined or lost and the student is a offended a little too easily. He needs to know that the Professor doesn't make the truth, but instead he sort of lets him win by his provoking and instead focus on his main studies, he's being sucked into a Religious debate and judging by the trailer loose his girlfriend all because of what one person said.

If you get hurt by what one person says, I'm sorry, you're too sensitive. I've been told that God is a " Fictional Character " " Fairy Tale character like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny " and that Christians are dumb idiots and that Christians are the reasons why the world is in despair. The Student can't let every single thing bother him, and just concentrate on his faith. But since he's the main character of the movie, he'll be awarded for this.

Still want to see the movie though, because I feel like the media these days are too anti- God, and it's nice for once to see something that fights for God instead of throwing him down. The Simpsons, Family Guy, Futurama, Bones, House, South Park, Big Bang Theory, The Mentalist and more are pro- Atheist and/ or pro Evolution.

 

[Nutari]

Just because people have PhDs in the subject doesn't mean that there's always a clear answer. Take literal vs metaphorical interpretation, for instance. This is a huge issue. What's meant to be taken literally? What's meant to be taken figuratively? Often times, it seems that things are taken literally up until such a perspective doesn't match close enough to modern understanding, when the metaphorical interpretation takes precedence.

I mean, even in the realm of science, which prides itself on a level of empiricism beyond that of most subjects, it isn't uncommon to find the top minds of any given field arguing over a collection of prominent theories. If even they are plagued by a certain degree of uncertainty, I can't imagine that religious studies are any more clear cut.

Well, I won't disagree. A vast majority of the uncertainties are in very small things that don't mar the larger picture. There are many main theologies that Christians must hold, but they can be divergent on smaller issues, ones that not change their being a Christian.

 

[Orion]

1 : Who's him ? What do you mean by him ? Do you mean the student or the Professor ? Student, yes because I'm Christian, the Professor however, no. The Professor could jump about and spew that God is Dead all he wants, he doesn't make the truth. Plus it's a hole in his statement, because you have to believe in something in order for it to be alive or dead. So, he's a silly Professor. If he didn't have some sort of faith in God, he would of worded his statement as " God is not real " instead of " God is Dead "

Herp derp. We know what's meant by when atheistic people say 'God is dead'. You're trying to make a dumb semantic point and failing to say anything useful.

Still want to see the movie though, because I feel like the media these days are too anti- God, and it's nice for once to see something that fights for God instead of throwing him down. The Simpsons, Family Guy, Futurama, Bones, House, South Park, Big Bang Theory, The Mentalist and more are pro- Atheist and/ or pro Evolution.

If you think being a Christian and accepting evolution are mutually exclusive, then that's totally on you. You've got a very narrow interpretation of creation and frankly you're just about denying facts to try and make your worldview consistent with a book, instead of being consistent with itself/reality. Most shows who take the piss out of evolution-denying Christians/Creationists are almost universally having a go at people and groups who find it unacceptable that evolution and Christianity could be true, not Christianity as a whole.

 

[Reagan Rayden]

If you think being a Christian and accepting evolution are mutually exclusive, then that's totally on you. You've got a very narrow interpretation of creation and frankly you're just about denying facts to try and make your worldview consistent with a book, instead of being consistent with itself/reality.

I'd have to agree. The Bible itself isn't always relevant in terms of scientific discussion. When it comes down to it, if you believe in God then you should believe that he created everything. That includes science and everything that is scientifically proven as fact.

 

[axel95]

Well, I won't disagree. A vast majority of the uncertainties are in very small things that don't mar the larger picture. There are many main theologies that Christians must hold, but they can be divergent on smaller issues, ones that not change their being a Christian.

For example: Look at all the views of how the creation happened. You have the Gap Theory, Day-Age Theory, and the Revelational Day Theory, among many others. But the point of Genesis 1 and 2 is to show that God created everything. Personally, I think the Day-Age theory is the most accurate. It basically means that instead God creating the world in six literal days, the word "day" in chapter 1 refers to a period of time. It could be a year, a decade, a century, a millennium, or even longer.

 

[Pinwheel]

are pro- Atheist and/ or pro Evolution.

I'm not seeing what's wrong here. Believe what you want to believe, the reason evolution is so strongly supported by the media is because evolution is so strongly supported scientifically.

 

[Reagan Rayden]

Personally, I think the Day-Age theory is the most accurate. It basically means that instead God creating the world in six literal days, the word "day" in chapter 1 refers to a period of time. It could be a year, a decade, a century, a millennium, or even longer.

That's fascinating because I came to that exact conclusion myself. When the universe was first made what was considered a day when the sun hadn't even formed yet?

I'll have to look that up.

 

[Solar]

I think, given the messiness and often chaos that went into the history of Christianity, language-centric exegeses have been ignored, especially given the nuances of Hebrew. For example, in the Qur'an, this whole notion of a day representing a long period of time is not apologetics so much as a logical axiom based on grammar (I'm a firm proponent of people more focusing on historical context and language than theological rhetoric):

As Muhammad Asad, whose translation of the Qur'an I heartily recommend to anyone interested in the text, observes in a footnote to 7:54,

The word yawm, commonly translated as "day" - but rendered above as "aeon" - is used in Arabic to denote any period, whether extremely long ("aeon") or extremely short ("moment"): its application to an earthly "day" of twenty-four hours is only one of its many connotations.

Thus perhaps its those techniques of exegesis people of other faiths should look to. It should be noted that the Arabic of the Qur'an Asad studied is certainly not the same as the myriad of modern dialects spoken all over the globe.

 

[misssheep]

I'm not seeing what's wrong here. Believe what you want to believe, the reason evolution is so strongly supported by the media is because evolution is so strongly supported scientifically.

Assuming here of course since, I don't know you personally but I bet if the media was more pro Christian faith, you'll wouldn't be so carefree about it. No, not really.

Example
In the September 6, 2000 edition of The Onion A.V. Club titled "Is There A God?", celebrities were asked the question.
Groening was among those asked.The Onion: Is there a God?
Matt Groening: [Laughs.] Hold on, I have to think about this.
[Long pause.] If there is a God, all evidence shows that He hates me.
-


The Onion: Is there a God?
Seth Green: Is there a God? It really depends on what religion you subscribe to.
O: Oh, man, that's cheap. Everyone else was like, "I don't know. Maybe."
SG: God is, to me, pretty much an idea. God is, to me, pretty much a myth created over time to deny the idea that we're all responsible for our own actions.

People usually have personal reasons why they don't support the Bible and instead support the idea that God was a fantasy created via Humans, and/ or Darwin's theory of Evolution.

Herp derp. We know what's meant by when atheistic people say 'God is dead'. You're trying to make a dumb semantic point and failing to say anything useful.

I was just expressing my opinion and thought on the subject and the movie. If you think that it was a dumb semantic point and failing to say anything useful, then whatevers.

That is your own personal opinion and maybe some others, but opinions none the less. Also trying to bring another person down ? Not cool, not cool at all.

If you think being a Christian and accepting evolution are mutually exclusive, then that's totally on you. You've got a very narrow interpretation of creation and frankly you're just about denying facts to try and make your worldview consistent with a book, instead of being consistent with itself/reality. Most shows who take the piss out of evolution-denying Christians/Creationists are almost universally having a go at people and groups who find it unacceptable that evolution and Christianity could be true, not Christianity as a whole.

You do realize that them having a go at people, those groups who find it unacceptable that Evolution and Christianity could exist is basically Christianity as a whole right ??

Christians believe that God Created Man, final. SOME Christians might believe in Evolution and the Adam/ Eve creation,but they would be pretty rare.

 

[Nyangoro]

Assuming here of course since, I don't know you personally but I bet if the media was more pro Christian faith, you'll wouldn't be so carefree about it. No, not really.

Example
In the September 6, 2000 edition of The Onion A.V. Club titled "Is There A God?", celebrities were asked the question.
Groening was among those asked.The Onion: Is there a God?
Matt Groening: [Laughs.] Hold on, I have to think about this.
[Long pause.] If there is a God, all evidence shows that He hates me.
-


The Onion: Is there a God?
Seth Green: Is there a God? It really depends on what religion you subscribe to.
O: Oh, man, that's cheap. Everyone else was like, "I don't know. Maybe."
SG: God is, to me, pretty much an idea. God is, to me, pretty much a myth created over time to deny the idea that we're all responsible for our own actions.

People usually have personal reasons why they don't support the Bible and instead support the idea that God was a fantasy created via Humans, and/ or Darwin's theory of Evolution.

I'm sorry, but you can't just make every "anti-Christian" sentiment all about some sort of deep-seeded personal issue with God. It's kind of egotistical to assume that everyone who disagrees with you does so for no other reason than that they are upset with your beliefs.

Many people don't have a "problem" with God. They merely believe he doesn't exist. I am one of them. I don't harbor an ounce of resentment towards any religion or what they worship. I simply cannot reach the conclusion that gods exist (especially not any one specific god) based on the things I've learned.

I was just expressing my opinion and thought on the subject and the movie. If you think that it was a dumb semantic point and failing to say anything useful, then whatevers.

That is your own personal opinion and maybe some others, but opinions none the less. Also trying to bring another person down ? Not cool, not cool at all.

The statement "God is dead," has nothing to do with the literal death of a previously living God. It's about the notion that God is no longer a necessity, that we've outgrown him. It's the notion that we no longer need to turn to the supernatural to explain phenomena, that we've reached a point where we understand that natural phenomena are the cause, and that anything we don't know merely means we haven't found the natural reason for it yet.

Whether or not you believe that sentiment is, of course, up to you; but that's what the statement is all about.

EDIT: Also, posts (and those in response to them) were deleted on the grounds that simple ad hominem does nothing for discussions and fosters unnecessary hostility.

 

[Pinwheel]

Assuming here of course since, I don't know you personally but I bet if the media was more pro Christian faith, you'll wouldn't be so carefree about it. No, not really.

The media promoting more Christian-faith based ideas and promoting evolution are only related if you try and relate them. Evolution is science-related, Christianity is religion-related.

 

[Orion]

I think, given the messiness and often chaos that went into the history of Christianity, language-centric exegeses have been ignored, especially given the nuances of Hebrew. For example, in the Qur'an, this whole notion of a day representing a long period of time is not apologetics so much as a logical axiom based on grammar (I'm a firm proponent of people more focusing on historical context and language than theological rhetoric):

As Muhammad Asad, whose translation of the Qur'an I heartily recommend to anyone interested in the text, observes in a footnote to 7:54,

Thus perhaps its those techniques of exegesis people of other faiths should look to. It should be noted that the Arabic of the Qur'an Asad studied is certainly not the same as the myriad of modern dialects spoken all over the globe.

I'm not sure how relevant it is to the particular phrases you refer to, but it's interesting to note that after the revelation of the Qur'an, efforts were made to change the Arabic language itself to fit the Qur'an, I suppose so that any one who understood Arabic at the time could read the Qur'an, but also as an effort to render the Qur'an more inerrant in its native language. So discussions about particular phrases are made doubly interesting with the Qur'an.

People usually have personal reasons why they don't support the Bible and instead support the idea that God was a fantasy created via Humans, and/ or Darwin's theory of Evolution.

Things evolution has nothing to do with, but you seem to get hung up on:
Morality
The origin of life
The origin of the universe
The soul
The afterlife
A divine creator/ordered

The only part where Christianity and evolution conflict is in how man came to be where he is.

That is your own personal opinion and maybe some others, but opinions none the less. Also trying to bring another person down ? Not cool, not cool at all.

I respect your right to an opinion. I'm under no obligation to respect the opinion itself. To me, it sounds like you've crafted in your own mind this image of evolution as this ultimate stumbling block that stops someone being a Christian, when it's really a tiny thing that poses hardly any trouble for believers. Does anything in the Bible significantly change if man is the highest form of life, but shared his past with 'lesser' primates?

You do realize that them having a go at people, those groups who find it unacceptable that Evolution and Christianity could exist is basically Christianity as a whole right ??
Christians believe that God Created Man, final. SOME Christians might believe in Evolution and the Adam/ Eve creation,but they would be pretty rare.

Here I am saying Christians are a diverse lot, and here you are generalising them whilst trying to speak authoritatively for basically every single one of them. The conflict isn't between Christianity and evolution, it's between evolution and creationism, and creationism is by no means the - nor even a - most important fundamental point of Christianity.

 

[Nyangoro]

[video=youtube;IrmBiLM5xjg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrmBiLM5xjg[/video]

oh boy, this is not going to go over well

 

[Reagan Rayden]

I doubt there would exist a college teacher of any kind that would force upon any kind of beliefs to their students. I get what this movie is trying to do here, but I just don't believe in that scenario ever happening in reality.

 

[Hidden]

Then, when I was in 11th grade, my US History teacher was talking about how important religion was in the lives of many of the early immigrants to America was. He said something along the lines of, "Most people back in this time didn't live nearly as long as we do today, and, unless they had a lot of money or power, their lives were generally pretty shitty. The concept of Heaven was only created so that those people back then had something to look forward to." I don't necessarily believe that, but it got me thinking: what if that IS all Heaven really is, just an idea? What if religion itself is just all made up? It's entirely possible, since I've never encountered concrete evidence that any religion I've ever heard of is actually true.

Taken from another thread, but apparently some teachers do.

And even beyond specific examples of professors stating their beliefs/lack thereof, there is the argument that most colleges and institutes of higher learning are secular in philosophy, even if they 'accept' students of all religious backgrounds. The philosophy that you must "check your beliefs" at the door of the classroom is something that I suspect many (not all) religious students have experienced and feel uncomfortable with.

 

[Space Cowboy]

[video=youtube;IrmBiLM5xjg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrmBiLM5xjg[/video]

oh boy, this is not going to go over well

I'm not sure what they were pushing harder in this trailer.

That apparently god's not dead or that band singing that fucking song.

And dat straw man argument again.

 

[Nyangoro]

I think what stuck out was how they added "science supports his existence" before that line from the first trailer. I'm actually kind of curious if they're going to expound that.