Christian theology isn’t about examining the evidence for the myths upon which Christianity is based nor is it about examining the origin of these myths; it’s all about assuming a whole bunch of absurd stories and alleged witness accounts are the truth and then memorizing them, right? Isn’t the best way to study Christian theology from a secular point of view? You know, to assume none of the myths are true unless there is evidence for them? Because if you assume they’re all true, you could very well be wasting your life chasing phantasms, right?|||You are making unjustified assumptions about the Bible. You have based your entire tirade on the assumption that the Bible is untrue. You haven't considered the following;
There are certain areas where we can test Biblical claims (Observable science, Historical science, Self consistency, Logical consistency, Prophetic fulfillment etc). Having thus far demonstrated reliability in these areas, it is perfectly reasonable to believe that the Bible is also reliable in claims that are untestable (ie. supernatural claims).
You ignore the possibility of personal proof - that God can reveal Himself to His followers supernaturally. The Bible does promises that if we sincerely seek God, we will find Him. You have arbitrarily ruled this out as a possibility.
"it’s all about assuming a whole bunch of absurd stories and alleged witness accounts are the truth and then memorizing them, right?"
Wrong. We don't just arbitrarily assume anything. There is more primary textual evidence supporting the accuracy of the Biblical account of Christ then for any other historical person or event (from Christian, Non-Christian and anti-Christian sources). There are also over 24000 Biblical manuscripts available to us for examination and comparison. The concept of blind faith is not Biblical. The Bible tells Christians to study and think about why we believe what we believe and to "test all things".
"Isn’t the best way to study Christian theology from a secular point of view?"
This is a nonsense. The idea that someone with no personal investment in a Christianity could comprehend theology as much as someone living Christianity is absurd. I've heard so many "religious experts" claim to know what Christians believe whilst demonstrating an inability to grasp even the basic concepts of Christian faith and doctrine.
Furthermore, this would contradict the Bible's basic proposition that we are all in need of personal salvation. Your innuendo actually confirms what the Bible says;
"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18)
"But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
"assume none of the myths are true unless there is evidence for them?"
Are we talking evidence or proof. As mentioned above, there is plenty of evidence supporting the reliability of the Bible (albeit, none of it qualifies as proof). And there is no proof against the reliability of the Bible. So why should I feel compelled to adopt your faith assumptions over my own?
If we adopt your proposed standard, we cannot make fact claims about any recorded event that happened in the past. Maybe Tacitus' 'Annuls of the Roman Empire' (from which we get the majority of our information about the Roman empire) is a mere fabrication. Another "absurd myth".
"Because if you assume they’re all true, you could very well be wasting your life chasing phantasms, right?"
Based on the wealth of "evidence", it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the Bible is reliable - the burden of proof is squarely on those who don't believe.|||Hardly you will find that secular points of view are automatically bias as well, as your very question so wonderfully gives evidence to my statement by say "it’s all about assuming a whole bunch of absurd stories and alleged witness accounts are the truth and then memorizing them, right?". Already you show your bias in even asking the question in such a manner. Nor can one assume that something happened or didn't when they weren't there to see it in the first place.
By assume something is a certain way the evidence wither consciously or not gets automatically twisted to your assumption. Better to go at it from a position of no assumptions.|||✞ The God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob has been proved over and over again...There is tons of proof that the Bible is in fact the true Word of God for someone interested in finding it. I have found however, that most people don't really want proof of God. They simply want to shove their heads in the sand and claim there is no God.
There is ridiculously well documented proof by looking at Bible prophecy, and there are also some scientific proofs showing that the Old Testament is the Word of God. Secular history records also document the accuracy of the New Testament.
I left you a link in case you wanted to search it out for yourself...|||Belief in Christianity hinges on the presupposition that Christianity is true, regardless of any logic or evidence to the contrary. Christians do not understand (or accept) the fact that they can possibly be wrong, because they have embraced a presuppositional logical fallacy that they do not comprehend. I could use the same argument to defend belief in Zeus, Thor and/or Allah.
If Christians understood even basic logic, there would be no Christians...|||Although the stories may be MYTHS, Theologists can still learns many morals an analyze many important ideas from these stories. I mean, look at all those people who analyze fictional books. Some of the greatest analysis come from books that obviously never occurred. Some Examples include: The Stranger, Catcher in the Rye, Alice in wonderland, Where The Wild Things Are, etc.
THE BIBLE may be false or true, but its still one of the most influential pieces of literature in the world. Simply because something is false, it does not mean that it is completely a waste of time. Those who believe that are ignorant.|||Desiree, I think you're on to something!
I wholeheartedly recommend that you investigate these "myths" from a secular standpoint. C.S. Lewis did. J.R.R. Tolkien did. Anne Rice did. Sir Arthur Eddington did. William F. Allbright did.
And they all -- authors, archaeologists, astrophysicists -- came to believe those things to be true.|||The true study of xian theology leads to conclusions such as can be found at the following sources:
www.exposingchristianity.com
www.skepticsannotatedbible.com
These sites describe parts of the bible, and from a truly secular point of view break them down into what they really are, twisted allegories...|||You are only predicated to believe one 'myth' as you put it: That Jesus Christ died on the cross for the sins of all people. The other 'myths' as you put them come about when you receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, and this leads you to all truth. And it's not enough to just believe..you must repent of your sins.|||This is not true, and if you are French it is inexcusable that you don't know the work of Rene Girard, elected to the French Immortals, for his work over the past 30+ years on this very topic !!!!
Please, watch this short clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5LkR3QNG8o%26amp;feature=channel|||Then maybe a different path is for you?
The only path to knowing God is through the study of Science-- and for that reason the Bible opens with a description of the creation.
Maimonides-Guide to the Perplexed (1190)|||Well then I guess I can't read and analyze George Orwell anymore?
I guess I'll stick to Carl Sagan.
http://thetopfive.tk|||Not necessarily - it could be done as an academic exercise, just like studying the Greek or Roman gods.
However, I suspect that belief would be the stance of most students.|||No, I'm a Christian, and I love to study Greek mythology. I don't have to believe in Zeus to study him.|||Christianity is so much more fascinating from a secular point of view.|||no christianity is not based on myths
its based on the word god gave us
men witnessed and saw god|||I think I love you.|||You are so dreamy. Can we meet up sometime so I can listen to your lovely ideas?|||why do u keep saying "right" in between sentences?|||No. It is not wrong.
First of all clarify what these myths are. But since you didnt, i'll take it to mean
the ministry of Jesus, and His Resurrection.
Think of it this, these so-called "Myths" have been around for around 2000 years.
Wouldnt you think somewhere along the lines, somebody would have thought to
question it and they probably have. But for 2000 years. People still believe in those
"myths" If these "myths" really were fictitious, it would not have survived for so long.
Point 2, just look at the trail of Blood. Look at the Martyrs, and the saints who died for the
faith. These people are not uneducated, dumb people or poor people who just cling
desperately to whatever source of hope they can .
Look at the martyrs. Look at St. Stephen, St Stephen, St. Peregrine. There are sooo many
martyr who died for this faith based on "myths". If these "myths" are not true, these people
wouldnt have sacrificed their lives defending it.
Look at the Saints. These people are incredibly intelligent and some even came from royalty. Look at
St. Ignatius of Loyola or St. Francis of Asisil; both came from rich and powerful families.
Look at St. Augustine, and St. Thomas Aquinas, both have written volumes and volumes
of intelligent and philosophical books.
-------------------------------
About memorizing these "absurb stories".
What is the best way to preserve ideas or teachings? By passing them down verbally? By writing
them down?
The answer is no for both of them. The answer is living these teachings out; living it out and
incorporating it into your daily life.
Passing it down verbally, is prone to errors. Just try passing a message verbally to a person, after them passing it down to about 10 people, the message would have a lot of mistakes already.
As for writing it down alone, Writing it down alone, leaves it open to many misinterpretations. Just look
at poems. No one can give the one universal meaning of a poem because there are many. The
poem may mean one thing to the creator, and another thing to the reader. Thats the problem
with simply writing it down.
Christians do not simply memorize these "stories".Christians live out the teachings within these stories.
What better way is there, then to live it out. By living out everything you believe in, there is no
space for doubt. Combined, with preserving a written text, you can correctly interpret what is
written in the text based on the context of the you living it out.
There! I hope I helped you even a little bit in your question.|||If there wasn't any decently solid proof for a religion/myth/whatever then it's just a fairy tail.
But what if there was a religion that did have some good historical and maybe even scientific proof supporting it?
Personally I was raised a Christian and I guess you're free to dismiss this because of my "bias." But I believe that everyone is biased.
I know of a couple renowned scholars, academics, physicists who set out to prove that Christianity was only based on mirrors and smoke, but ended up Christians themselves because of the secular proof they found.
Anyways, Christianity does seem like a major pain to me. In fact I would rather not be a believer. However I do think that there is really solid evidence for Christianity.
(Sorry for rambling a bit here but it's my favorite topic to talk about)
Historical main point, the Christian church was founded and the New Testament written when their were still eyewitnesses who saw Jesus Christ. If it was only myth, and the early church was spread on word of mouth, then it would have failed and never survived.
Scientific main point, If everything that has a beginning has a cause, and the universe has a beginning, then the universe has a cause. And that cause would have to transcend space and time and exist in sheer nothingness. Then there are the astronomical odds of the physical constants of the universe turning out just right in order for their to actually be stars and planets. And then for a planet to be in just the right spot to have water and not be irradiated by a supernova or other threat goes against all odds. And then the fact that the time it took for earth to stop being molten lava and the first fossils of life to appear, and how irreducibly complex the most simple cell is. To believe that it just occurred randomly also goes against all odds. And I'm not talking 1 out of fifty. A conservative estimate is 1 out of 10^53.
So for me, the scientific proof says "Something is out there." And the historical proof in (and out of) the Bible says "The Bible is right."|||Absolutely not!
You do not have to BELIEVE something in order to STUDY it!
You don't need to believe in Zeus to study Greek mythology.
You don't need to believe is Shiva to study Hinduism.
You don't need to believe in Thor to study Norse mythology.
You don't need to believe in Jesus to study Christianity.
You don't need to believe in Allah to study Islam.
You are confusing the methods of studying the pure sciences with the methods of studying the social sciences and the metaphysical sciences.
Learn the difference!
