Breaking Bad Religion

[NormATive]

Ehrman has been an agnostic for 20 years now, and has been a popular critic of traditional Christianity at least since his 1996 book The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture. You're out of touch man! :)

Apparently. I was never really a very big fan of his commentaries. So, eventually, I stopped paying attention. Robrecht actually turned me on to this book. I did learn a few things about Judaism during this time period of which I was unaware.

NORM

[Spartacus]

I understand the desire to put the past behind - there was a lot of bad stuff back there. But, it is important to know where that bad stuff came from.

NORM

Constantine. Popes. The devil. Doesn't much matter to them. They've excused themselves.

[OingoBoingo]

Apparently. I was never really a very big fan of his commentaries. So, eventually, I stopped paying attention. Robrecht actually turned me on to this book. I did learn a few things about Judaism during this time period of which I was unaware.

NORM

Which commentaries? I didn't know he did any.

[Scrawly]

I sometimes try to imagine not so much what Christianity will be like a few million years from now, but how they will look back upon our time. Will we be seen as part of the early church? Will Jesus Christ Superstar be seen as ancient and canonical? Will there be an early Christian heresy named after me? More seriously, the Trinity will not change but there has already been a decades long emphasis on 'Christology from Below', many differing views of atonement dating back long before Anselm. Likewise, original sin has always been understood very differently in the East. In general, I think there has been a general trend toward more dicerstiy and appreciation of diversity. One of the things I always loved about Judaism is the sense of humor about disagreements and the love of argument depicting very different perspectives which somehow merge together toward a multifaceted communal view of truth. I think as Christianity becomes as old as Judaism, it will mature into this kind of appreciation of various perspectives. If it does not, it will die out. Everything that is not evolving is becoming extinct. I am very optimistic about Christianity surviving, evolving, and flourishing, and hopefully healing the rift with Judaism.

I think the bolded would be true if the Scriptures were false. If we believe the Scriptures then we would acknowledge that Jesus built His church and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. The invisible church, which constitutes regenerate, born-again believers, is being added to daily through the proclamation of the gospel and the working of the Spirit in the hearts and minds of God's children.

[robrecht]

I think the bolded would be true if the Scriptures were false. If we believe the Scriptures then we would acknowledge that Jesus built His church and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. The invisible church, which constitutes regenerate, born-again believers, is being added to daily through the proclamation of the gospel and the working of the Spirit in the hearts and minds of God's children.

Or both could be true and God intends for churches to grow, evolve, and mature.

[Scrawly]

Or both could be true and God intends for churches to grow, evolve, and mature.

Interesting view but it does seem to go against the admonishment in Jude 1:3 to contend for the faith that was once for all handed down to the Saints.

[robrecht]

Interesting view but it does seem to go against the admonishment in Jude 1:3 to contend for the faith that was once for all handed down to the Saints.

The churches and doctrine can evolve to better express the ancient faith in a new situation. This view of faith is not primarily propositional, like doctrinal tenets, but the life of trust and expression of faithful obedience to God. Traditionally, this is the distinction between the fides quae, that which we believe, and the fides qua, that by which we believe. Ultimately, the faith that was handed down to our predecessors and to us is the faith of Christ expressed in his obedient life and sacrificial death, a faithful trust in God.

[One Bad Pig]

Or both could be true and God intends for churches to grow, evolve, and mature.

Grow and mature, yes. Evolve, not so much. The churches which have evolved the most lately (mainline Protestants) are dying, not growing.

[robrecht]

Grow and mature, yes. Evolve, not so much. The churches which have evolved the most lately (mainline Protestants) are dying, not growing.

That sounds more like extinction, not evolution. I'm endorsing the latter, not the former!

[KingsGambit]

The churches and doctrine can evolve to better express the ancient faith in a new situation. This view of faith is not primarily propositional, like doctrinal tenets, but the life of trust and expression of faithful obedience to God. Traditionally, this is the distinction between the fides quae, that which we believe, and the fides qua, that by which we believe. Ultimately, the faith that was handed down to our predecessors and to us is the faith of Christ expressed in his obedient life and sacrificial death, a faithful trust in God.

So does this last sentence summarize what the ancient faith/bedrock would be in your view?

[robrecht]

So does this last sentence summarize what the ancient faith/bedrock would be in your view?

I was only trying to discuss two different aspects of the word faith so, no, I would have to think about that some more. I would probably add references to the Father and the Spirit, the importance of service, striving to live a moral life in community, repentance, prayer, etc.

[One Bad Pig]

That sounds more like extinction, not evolution. I'm endorsing the latter, not the former!

But IMO evolution will tend toward extinction. The world evolves, yes. "Be not conformed to the pattern of this world. . ."

[robrecht]

But IMO evolution will tend toward extinction. The world evolves, yes. "Be not conformed to the pattern of this world. . ."

Two can play at this:

"So if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation: the old things have gone by the wayside. Behold, the new things have come to be."

[KingsGambit]

Two can play at this:

"So if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation: the old things have gone by the wayside. Behold, the new things have come to be."

Wouldn't this refer to new in terms of new to the individual person, not new to society as a whole?

[robrecht]

Wouldn't this refer to new in terms of new to the individual person, not new to society as a whole?

Not just the individual Christian, and not necessarily society as a whole, but for the whole community of the Church, and even the whole world in some sense. Paul speaks here of God reconciling us (plural) and the world to himself, not keeping track of their (plural) offenses.