i was raised christian but decided i was an atheist at a young age.
i want to get back into christianity but have a hard time reconciling my beliefs that events such as the resurrection of christ are scientifically possible. i understand that you must have faith to believe such things, but i am having trouble getting to that point
any advice?
Other urls found in this thread:
vimeo.com
pastebin.com
youtube.com
reasonablefaith.org
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
amazon.com
amazon.com
youtube.com
catholic.com
amazon
twitter.com
>i want to get back into christianity
Why?
Let's start with this: name one "scientifically" possible thing in this world that is important.
Read Reasonable Faith by Dr. William Lane Craig
mostly for historical cultural reasons. if it was good enough for 1000-1500 years of my ancestors, why am i good enough to say it isn't?
what do you mean by that m8y? there's a shit ton of scientifically proven events that have contributed significantly to our modern understanding of the world
give me a synopsis?
Pick any one of those things. If not the most important, which is the most interesting to you?
Listen to this ..its answers a lot of questions. vimeo.com
leafs go away
i mean, there's a ton. let's start with the big bang theory. if i believe scientifically that the big bang occurred, how can i reconcile that with the belief that the universe was created by god?
some would argue that god "created" the big bang, but i feel a big chunk of christians would argue against such a belief
>want to believe in Christ the Son Of God who was conceived from a virgin birth
>Tha science facts on how he rose from dead is confusing tho
How about you just fuck off? Kay?
...
Try Islam.
Says Christ's death was faked.
Way more autistic... I mean scientific.
you left for a reason. maybe it's not meant to be.
God as a creator of the universe i can maybe swallow, i mean who knows? Actual Christian mythology? How the fuck do people still swallow that?
If anything it dimishes the idea of God, of this being who is so above us all it would think of us as microbes, and makes him seem like a petty stupid asshole
>how can i reconcile that with the belief that the universe was created by god?
You realize it was a catholic priest who first proposed the big bang, right? What in the fuck makes people think the big bang is incompatible with monotheism, anyway?
Cause and effect exists.
Cannot sustain infinity regression
The first cause must be the sustainer
A super cause that isn't deterministic like our universe
A non-deterministic is cause self-generating
This Creative power is what theists call God
Books:
The Creation Answers Book: David Catchpoole
Taking Back Astronomy: The Heavens Declare Creation: Dr. Jason Lisle
Ultimate Proof of Creation: Dr. Jason Lisle
Learn the Bible in 24 Hours: Chuck Missler
Has God Spoken: A.O. Schnabel
The Genesis Account: Jonathan D. Sarfati
The Genesis Flood 50th Anniversary Edition: by John C. Whitcomb (Author), Henry M. Morris (Author)
Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome: Dr. J. C. Sanford
youtube.com
IP is great.
Recovered atheist here. Go back to mass and pray for repentance (sacrament of reconciliation, if Catholic). God is ever merciful and gracious. We are all sinners and not worthy of his kingdom. Yet he sent his own Son to die for our sins, so that we may sit beside Him in the kingdom of Heaven despite our imperfections. If you start living more like Christ, God will bless you.
this is long and involves maths:
>reasonablefaith.org
google 'historicity of the resurrection' for more answers on your topic
also, stop caring about shit being scientifically possible or not. matters of faith are not scientific questions. remember that if you trust only in science, there is no such thing as free will and nothing means anything, the only reason you don't kill yourself is because you're a selfish coward
I think the hardest part for me to get is taking it on faith, I mean the entire story seems a lot more probable to have been faked and it is difficult to understand why we should believe it.
typical ozzie
i would say the big bang inherently is a scientific belief, which seems to conflict with christianity, as ive mentioned in previous posts, and which is why i'm asking how others have dealt with it
not raised catholic, sorry bud
you have a biological need to believe in something greater than yourself.
Organized religions are a bunch of hooey, but they have thousands of years of trial and error and have perfected the formula.
I recommend you mindlessly follow whatever your priest says, you will be ok
>not raised catholic, sorry bud
oh, then you're not really a christian, user
in texas the only catholics are mexicans ;)
so how do i believe it? i mean it's easy for those raised to not think for themselves to buy in, but how do i do it? and don't take this as a "i'm so much smarter than christians" type argument, i'm being serious
you seem to be under the impression that science and Christianity are at qualms with each other or are mutually exclusive things?
go give latria to dead saints
>big bang inherently is a scientific belief, which seems to conflict with christianity
>conflict with christianity
>bing bang theory was literally developed by a catholic priest
en.wikipedia.org
protestant scum are literally this stupid
i would argue that they are opposed to one another, and the reason christians accept that is through faith. that is the whole point of my post. i'm trying to get to the faith aspect.
Just pretend it's real, like most of the clergy in the Catholic church.
It's not real, the dates in the Bible don't even match. It's all written 30+ or over 100 years after "Jesus" died, there's even older writing describing Jesus before he was "born".
It's bullshit, obviously. You can't get un-red pilled. You can only pretend if it makes you feel good.
I'd have an easier time responding if you could identify how or why the big bang is incompatible with Christianity other than "it's science-y"
I don't think I really do, I believe in God because of other reasons but Christianity I'm on the fence
>mostly for historical cultural reasons. if it was good enough for 1000-1500 years of my ancestors, why am i good enough to say it isn't?
Lol you are killing your brain if you just want to believe in fairytales because someone else did before you.
Just do the opposite of what Jews say and you will coincidentally be a pretty good Christian.
christians believe god created the universe.
the big bang argues that the universe was created organically.
i don't understand why you find that difficult to reconcile
Why would you want to belong to a suicide cult that teaches you to be the cuck of everyone and never defend yourself?
Same here. I am reading the Bible again from the beginning now. I am also doing, as they say, "fake it till you make it", in a sense. I'm praying and stuff and hopefully I will start believing it again. I encourage you to read the Bible and try praying again, and hopefully it will grow on you again.
I am getting back into because I realized that Christianity is against all of the degeneracy that we are seeing in the world today.
December 21 - Sun at lowest point in horizon
December 22-24 - Sun stays in constellation Crux (cross) for 3 days
December 25 - Sun rises 1 degree in the horizon
That is where the story of Jesus came from. It doesn't matter whether or not it is real. Kikes try to put the burden of proof on you to shake your faith. The moral of the story is what is important. You don't need to take the Bible literally word for word. Just listen to what the allegorical stories are trying to teach you.
>was created organically
what does that even mean?
the big bang argues that all matter of the universe existed in a single concentrated point that exploded and uses this as a means to explain the universe's constant expansion
>if i believe scientifically that the big bang occurred, how can i reconcile that with the belief that the universe was created by god?
Uhh because they're practically the same thing? In the early days of the Big Bang Theory a lot of scientists tried to suppress it due to it's obvious links to creationism.
Remember to pray for the right things. Pray for wisdom, and conform to the truth
find a good church user
realize a good church is a bastion against degeneracy and you will be with fellow believers and maybe find a small group to grow you spiritually. That's what I did.
CATHOLIC GENERAL
I'm not Catholic.
...
Thanks, I will.
Bible study is good, too.
>realize a good church is a bastion against degeneracy
key word being 'good'
which is good is the hard part
Recently reconciled my faith. The issue for me was a need to be around people who held themselves to higher moral and ethical standards. Granted, there are bad Christians (as with every religion) who are there for their own selfish reasons, but I think generally speaking, those who I have spent my time with actually believe they are helping others. I would strongly recommend you follow the readings listed in this thread.
The God/science conundrum is difficult to deal with initially. Our scientific and logical means of assessing the world around us are limited and fail to disprove the existence of our God.
That aside, I think all young men and women can greatly benefit from the teachings of the church at a time where we see mass degeneracy, it is the helping hand we need.
Give it a go, and if you're still not convinced then you can revisit it later on in life.
out of curiosity, why did you choose Catholicism over Orthodoxy?
Ask on the general, m8!
how do you declare yourself as christian when literally everybody you know is an atheist or some kind of agnostic who hate religion ?
you know how these cunts are theyll think youre suddenly stupid and want to ''debate'' like autistic children.
Christfag here.
Don't worry too much about the validity of the Bible itself, when the events happened, if Moses could actually part the sea and shit. Look at it as simple allegory. There are messages behind these myths, that's what is important.
If they fail to accept your faith, then I suggest you get new friends.
Essentially this. The book is philosophical and if you try and understand it in a literal sense, then you will probably want to an hero.
lol organically
Even a basic understanding of the Big Bang should allow some reasonable comparability, especially with the complete uncertaintity of pre-event reality and the very short moments following it
>calling yourself what you are not
the book is meant to be taken literally, it is the infallible word of god
yes, every word of the old testament stood true. we are in the period of grace now, the new covenant, but what you read about in leviticus was exactly how things were
It's not the science you should be taking away from the stories, but the metaphors and the morals behind them. Like Adam and Eve, where the man wasn't strong enough to control his woman and lead them both to ruin(along with the obvious "listen to god" moral).
>Being this unaware of the complexity of the bible.
There is a strong case based on historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ.
Read Michael Green, "Was Jesus Who He Said He Was?" for a short, but nicely written explanation of the historical case for Christ.
Link: amazon.com
A lesser book, aimed at high school students, and unfortunately written in a kind of golly-gee-whiz style is "More Than A Carpenter" by Josh McDowell. Despite the corny writing style, however, the book sets out a strong body of factual evidence in a straightforward, persuasive way.
Link: amazon.com
Both books are blessedly short, concise and to the point.
At law, there are basically three standards of proof. The highest standard is used in criminal cases, proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
A much less stringent standard is used in civil cases, preponderance of the evidence, which basically means that the winning argument must have just a little more than half, or 51% of the evidence in its favor.
A middle standard, clear and convincing evidence, is sometimes used in the case of serious torts. This is more exacting standard than preponderance of the evidence, but not as demanding as proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The clear and convincing standard is usually described as requiring that the evidence is highly and substantially more probable to be true than not.
In my view, the historical evidence for the resurrection, as laid out in those two books, meets the standard of clear and convincing evidence.
Based on your description of where you're at, I think you'd find them helpful in thinking through these issues.
there are all kinds of literary devices at use throughout the bible, however, it is still a spiritual book
the stories of supernatural occurrences - what are they to you?
and yes, i've read it cover to cover
If you fail to recognise that it is a philosophical text then you are kidding yourself. The teachings in the book have been translated, transliterated time and time again. The meaning behind it however still seems evident. It is a guide to being a civilised human being.
Instead of just reading the bible, I would encourage you to take a broader reading of the bible from an academic perspective.
>any advice?
The singularity at the heart of the commencement of the universe is 'scientifically impossible'
Nuclear weapons were scientifically impossible in 1850
A belt fed machine gun was scientifically impossible in 1000AD
For someone claiming to have considered the matter you are either
a)Not very bright
b)Another fuckwit atheist trolling
I'm guessing b.
What's the evidence consist of? Just sum it up. No one is going to read those books. Prove the story behind Christ is factual.
>i would say the big bang inherently is a scientific belief, which seems to conflict with christianity
I have to go to bed soon, so I can't get into this, but the big bang does *not* conflict with the beliefs of most Christians. The exception are the young earth creationists, a rather noisy subset, but I'm pretty sure a distinct minority within US Christianity as a whole.
For those who aren't young earth creationists, the big bang is looked at as a *good* thing, as evidence in favor of there being a God.
Here's a video that sketches out the facts behind what mentioned: the big bang was first proposed by a Catholic priest. Einstein did not accept this right away. He preferred the old theory, that the universe was in a "steady state," non-expanding, had existed eternally, with no clear starting point. He, and many scientists, were uneasy with the idea that the universe had a clear starting point, a possible "Let there be light" moment, if you will.
youtube.com
You mentioned you were not raised Catholic, user.
Please check out this concise description of the truth claims of the Catholic Church, which was personally founded and established by none other than Jesus Christ when He walked the other some 2000 years ago:
catholic.com
>catholic.com
Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any institution in history.
Checked.
Are you a millennial?
>the exception are the young earth creationists
not even they would find the big bang to be in conflict with Christian theology
evolution yes, but not big bang
the big bang is literally a non-issue to everyone
If not blindly following a religion because there's no evidence of it being true likens me to being a millennial, then I have no problem admitting I'm a millennial.
I am only asking because you want everything summed up instead of putting in the effort to find the answers for yourself.
Perhaps you are better suited to this....
amazon co uk/Christianity-Dummies-Richard-Wagner/dp/0764544829
The claims are based on three areas of evidence:
- The Manuscript Evidence (Do we have a reliable text in light of the process of textual transmission by which the documents have reached us?)
- The Internal Evidence (whether the written record is credible and to what extent)
- The External Evidence (whether other historical material confirms or denies the internal testimony of the documents themselves)
YOU SHOULD READ THE BOOKS.
They're easily obtained, and easy to read.
I'm kind of in the same boat. I don't believe the miracles are factually true, but the core teachings of Christ are very much a path that can lead humanity to a world that is much better for everybody. I suggest getting the Jefferson bible; the story of Christ without any of the gimmicky 'look magic' 'do what I say and you'll get candy in heaven' stuff to manipulate children and the weak-minded.
Keep up, user. Grounded, scientific minds that seek the truth in lessons of goodness are a rare treasure that the world needs more of.