RE: Rational defense of Christianity?
January 2, 2015 at 11:04 am
(This post was last modified: January 2, 2015 at 11:45 am by watchamadoodle.)
(January 1, 2015 at 7:56 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: 'Facts' as in scientific information ie information revealing the mechanics of creation is NOT the subject of the bible. If you're looking for those facts you are looking in the wrong place. No reasonable person would make this mistake, but I feel it's necessary to point it out.
Science moves on. Nothing much stays the same (to scientific understanding). Our understanding evolves and improves constantly. This is the amazing thing about science. We would be foolish to declare ourselves at the pinnacle of all understanding. Ever. In just a few years we could have very different ideas.
What would a scientific revelation prove (hard scientific fact written in religious texts, beyond what the technology of the time was capable of) in theological terms? That belief in God cannot be doubted? To me, that would be contradictory. Belief has to be a choice. If you don't choose to believe, then you cannot believe.
To clarify, the factual errors that bother me relate to the historical narratives - not science. The nativity stories in the gospels are a good example (since we just finished Christmas). I'm sure somebody could list hundreds of these types of factual errors. In other words, the factual errors problem is bigger than Noah's ark and affects the NT as well as the OT.
Also, your point about science always changing leads me to ask why Christianity and the Bible shouldn't be always changing too. Biblical inerrancy works against this.
(January 2, 2015 at 11:04 am)abaris Wrote:(January 2, 2015 at 8:29 am)watchamadoodle Wrote: In my case, I asked if a God might exist that appears to be the Christian God to Christians, Hindu God(s) to Hindus, etc. This would open the possibility that people have true interactions with God in spite of their religions being false. Religious people would simply hear God in their own religious language using the religious vocabulary available.
You probably would have more luck if you were to look for a European board instead of an American one. Mainstream protestants and mainstream catholics usually aren't that stubbornly fixated on everything being literal. It's the Evangelicals, wo are even afraid of opening a science book, in case they might actually learn something that doesn't conform with their presupposition.
That's a good possibility. English is my only language, so that limits me. I saw some Anglican forums that might be more rational.
