RE: Why do Christians become Christians?
May 7, 2016 at 7:28 pm
(This post was last modified: May 7, 2016 at 7:50 pm by TheRocketSurgeon.)
(May 7, 2016 at 1:37 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(May 5, 2016 at 6:05 pm)SteveII Wrote:
A good question. I think that there are a number of different reasons. It also may be difficult to answer, as I see a difference, in what first pointed one towards Christianity, and why they became a Christian as more of process. Some are Christians, because their parents where Christians, for some it is a warm fuzzy feeling, for some it is because of evidence, and some through personal experience. Some come to Christianity later in life, through evidence. For Blaise Pascal and John Newton and from what I hear a growing number in Muslim countries it is because of a vision. For myself, it was largely the history, that the faith was built upon, and referencing back to that history.
I do think that you may be under estimating apologetics however. A good number of people come to God through reason. J. Warner Wallace recently posted on this. Both himself and the interviewer (Abdu Murray) both became Christians because of evidence. http://coldcasechristianity.com/2016/i-c...ologetics/ I think you would probably like Wallaces books. He says a lot about his coming to be a Christian from what he describes as a aggressive atheists, and his approach and experience as an investigative detective.
I'm glad you asked the question. I'm finding the responses both interesting and informative.
You know, I've not read Wallace. I have, however, been reading about him (from his own online writings and what a lot of his adoring fans write about him), and I'm laughing so hard I can hardly type!
To start with, he frequently references McDowell and Strobel, two of the worst apologists I've ever encountered (and yes, I have several of their books, from before I left the faith and while my family was trying to stop me from deconverting). His explanations of why the Gospels may be considered valid eyewitness accounts not only leave out the myriad problems with relying on eyewitness testimony--in other words, he paints a rosy picture of eyewitness testimony, which is hardly surprising for a Homicide detective to consider as more reliable than actual studies demonstrate that it is, not to mention the whole "every person who is later proven innocent by science was convicted by a homicide detective's reading and interpretation of the eyewitness accounts" thing--but it also ignores the rapidly-increasing "claims of divinity/magic over time", as each new account is turned in (written), which should be a giant, waving red flag to any honest cop, between the time of the early Epistles, to Mark, and eventually to John. Most laughably, he refers to the (relative) consistency of the gospels and the fact that they were selected by the church fathers for "accuracy" over 300 years after Jesus' death, as evidence of their trustworthiness. What a joke!
It's like claiming that, if a committee of Soviet commissars chose a bunch of red cards out of a deck, that it means red is the right color. No bias on the selection committee! No chance that the reason those were chosen is they suited the particular theology of that sect (Orthodoxy, as it would come to be called). If that constitutes Christian "reasoning", then I'm terrified for all the people he wrongly put in prison as a result of his "reasoning" process.
I especially laughed at his attack on methodological naturalism, in which he gave the example of his partner, who presumed the husband had murdered his wife because that was "usually" the case in such murders, when in fact it was the neighbor, and then implied that because naturalists exclude supernatural explanations, our minds are closed. It's the biggest red herring I've seen in months! There is not now, nor has there ever been, actual evidence of supernatural events-- except for eyewitness testimony, the same "evidence" that gives us alien abductions in the Nevada desert and houses alleged to be haunted by ghosts. I'm really not kidding, RoadRunner... you really really need to read The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, so you can furnish yourself with a Baloney Detection Kit, and begin to understand the common thread (and human psychology involved) in pseudoscientific, magical claims by "eyewitnesses".
Edit to Add: Turns out, at least the BDK is online. (I still recommend you read the fuller explanation in the book.) http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/lehre/pmo/en...aloney.pdf
Michael Shermer has a good summary, too. http://homepages.wmich.edu/~korista/baloney.html
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
