Breaking Bad Religion

[whag]

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

Conformity to the world can mean anything. Anyone can look at the expression of one's Christianity and criticize it. Look at Licona and how his simply acknowledging Matthew 27 didn't literally happen became a controversy.

It could also be argued that owning an iPhone or playing video games is conformity to the world. There's huge room for interpretation here.

[NormATive]

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

Actually, I was confusing him with Karl Bath. They were a series of commentaries on every book in the Bible. I didn't care for them.

NORM

[NormATive]

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.

I think that most of the problems religions foist on the world are a result of over-dependence on an ancient book or set of beliefs. Evolution means weaning ourselves away from idolatry of dogmas that are no longer relevant to the world as it evolves. I think this is what Jesus was up to in a way, although he incorporated it within an apocalyptic worldview - in other words, he didn't think the world would last past his generation.

A Rabbi I was studying under once told me that the Jewish people evolved after the Shoah. He said that the community prayed, offered sacrifices in secret, sought the face of G-d as prescribed in II Chronicles 7:14, and cried out in despair as in Psalm 130 - to no avail. It fell on the deaf ears of a G-d who no longer "hears" the cries of it's people.

In those days, we learned to remove ourselves from the bondage of our dogmas and proscriptions and endless supplications to a static deity and a stale book that was no longer relevant in the face of Fascism and Bigotry. We looked at the words of Hillel:

"If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, who am I? If not now, when?" Ethics of the Fathers, 1:14

It was painful, and there are those who dug their heels in (Ultra Orthodox / Hassidim) and clung to the old ways.

The rest moved on and evolved a more earth-bound faith, less concerned with "rightly dividing the word of truth." One that is centered on dealing with problems in the here and now, making the world a better place through social reform (Jews were prominent in the Civil Rights movement, for example) and activism.

I think that Christianity is heading in the same direction. I think that they are mostly coming from the more liberal, mainline churches. These people have evolved a more secular faith - one that embraces the greater community outside of the Church proper, which is why you see a drop in those populations. There just is no need for those expensive, gilded palaces to offer prayers and praises to a G-d that isn't listening to that self-righteous noise anyway.

NORM

[OingoBoingo]

I think that most of the problems religions foist on the world are a result of over-dependence on an ancient book or set of beliefs. Evolution means weaning ourselves away from idolatry of dogmas that are no longer relevant to the world as it evolves. I think this is what Jesus was up to in a way, although he incorporated it within an apocalyptic worldview - in other words, he didn't think the world would last past his generation.

A Rabbi I was studying under once told me that the Jewish people evolved after the Shoah. He said that the community prayed, offered sacrifices in secret, sought the face of G-d as prescribed in II Chronicles 7:14, and cried out in despair as in Psalm 130 - to no avail. It fell on the deaf ears of a G-d who no longer "hears" the cries of it's people.

In those days, we learned to remove ourselves from the bondage of our dogmas and proscriptions and endless supplications to a static deity and a stale book that was no longer relevant in the face of Fascism and Bigotry. We looked at the words of Hillel:



It was painful, and there are those who dug their heels in (Ultra Orthodox / Hassidim) and clung to the old ways.

The rest moved on and evolved a more earth-bound faith, less concerned with "rightly dividing the word of truth." One that is centered on dealing with problems in the here and now, making the world a better place through social reform (Jews were prominent in the Civil Rights movement, for example) and activism.

I think that Christianity is heading in the same direction. I think that they are mostly coming from the more liberal, mainline churches. These people have evolved a more secular faith - one that embraces the greater community outside of the Church proper, which is why you see a drop in those populations. There just is no need for those expensive, gilded palaces to offer prayers and praises to a G-d that isn't listening to that self-righteous noise anyway.

NORM

You evolved yourself right out of believing in the God of Judaism altogether though. You still go to synagogue (a palace for prayers and praise), but no longer believe or worship him. In your case, One Bad Pig was right. Your evolution tended towards extinction.

[NormATive]

You evolved yourself right out of believing in the God of Judaism altogether though. You still go to synagogue (a palace for prayers and praise), but no longer believe or worship him. In your case, One Bad Pig was right. Your evolution tended towards extinction.

That's one way of looking at it. A rather negative way, but I understand where you are coming from.

The synagogue is used more for social good than just for prayers and praise these days. We run a daycare for single moms, we have a social outreach program, a youth program (they come up with social welfare projects to do for Bar or Bat Mitzvah instead of / or including memorizing scripture in Hebrew), a food pantry, and many, many more such programs. In fact, synagogue worship is probably the minority use of the place!

We still celebrate the festivals, but they are infused with more relevance than in the olden days when they were just done for the sake of doing them.

I prefer to think of G-d as a ground of being within ourselves - a state of consciousness of the created world around us and embracing what we have the capacity to change. I think we honor the spirit of G-d in that way.

I think that the collective wisdom of all of the world's faith groups can best be put to use in this way.

NORM

[One Bad Pig]

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."

Which has what to do with the price of tea in China? That's dealing with pre/post-conversion.

[One Bad Pig]

Conformity to the world can mean anything. Anyone can look at the expression of one's Christianity and criticize it. Look at Licona and how his simply acknowledging Matthew 27 didn't literally happen became a controversy.

You've mischaracterized Licona, as have most of his opponents. I'm referring more to change qua change, though.

It could also be argued that owning an iPhone or playing video games is conformity to the world.

Neither of those examples has much to do with the evolution (or lack thereof) of religion.

There's huge room for interpretation here.

Yes, there is.

[robrecht]

Which has what to do with the price of tea in China? That's dealing with pre/post-conversion.

I see the need for continual repentance and conversion, and do not see this as merely an individual process, but rather for communities and the communion of churches. When we speak of the need for growth and greater maturity, I see that as sometimes requiring evolution that ensures survival of the faithful church, not just faithful to tradition but faithful to the Spirit that calls us anew each day as we embrace the mission to bring the gospel of repentance and redemption to the entire world. If you agree with the need for growth and greater maturity but just object to the use of the word 'evolution', we probably agree on much of the substance. Do you disagree that the church has evolved in the past? If not, can we not continue to evolve into the future?

[whag]

You've mischaracterized Licona, as have most of his opponents. I'm referring more to change qua change, though.

He said it might not have literally happened. That's an even less controversial position to take. Imagine if he actually denied inerrancy. My point being the denial of inerrancy is a fairly reasonable conclusion to arrive at, yet many Christians would be quick to say that's conformity to the patterns of the world.

Neither of those examples has much to do with the evolution (or lack thereof) of religion.

Fair enough. One's position on inerrancy is a sufficient example of religious "evolution" that can be easily seen as "conformity."

[Scrawly]

I think that most of the problems religions foist on the world are a result of over-dependence on an ancient book or set of beliefs. Evolution means weaning ourselves away from idolatry of dogmas that are no longer relevant to the world as it evolves.

I disagree. I think that sound doctrine is inherently healthy and earthy. For the mature believer with a robust Christian worldview, right doctrine will produce right living that leads to flourishing both spiritually and practically that ultimately yields much good in the here and now. I am reminded of C.S Lewis' words: "Aim for heaven and you'll get earth thrown in".

I think this is what Jesus was up to in a way, although he incorporated it within an apocalyptic worldview - in other words, he didn't think the world would last past his generation.

Of course we will be disagreeing here.

A Rabbi I was studying under once told me that the Jewish people evolved after the Shoah. He said that the community prayed, offered sacrifices in secret, sought the face of G-d as prescribed in II Chronicles 7:14, and cried out in despair as in Psalm 130 - to no avail. It fell on the deaf ears of a G-d who no longer "hears" the cries of it's people.

Yes the problem of evil causes many to fall away from the faith they profess.

In those days, we learned to remove ourselves from the bondage of our dogmas and proscriptions and endless supplications to a static deity and a stale book that was no longer relevant in the face of Fascism and Bigotry. We looked at the words of Hillel:

Often times when undergoing suffering many tend to lose sight of an eternal perspective. Others will go through the fire and come out the other side saying: "What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?" (Rom. 8:31).

It was painful, and there are those who dug their heels in (Ultra Orthodox / Hassidim) and clung to the old ways.

The rest moved on and evolved a more earth-bound faith, less concerned with "rightly dividing the word of truth." One that is centered on dealing with problems in the here and now, making the world a better place through social reform (Jews were prominent in the Civil Rights movement, for example) and activism.

As stated previously right doctrine leads to right living. If you find yourself cloistered in a self-righteous bubble, most likely you don't have right doctrine to begin with.

I think that Christianity is heading in the same direction. I think that they are mostly coming from the more liberal, mainline churches. These people have evolved a more secular faith - one that embraces the greater community outside of the Church proper, which is why you see a drop in those populations. There just is no need for those expensive, gilded palaces to offer prayers and praises to a G-d that isn't listening to that self-righteous noise anyway.

Well if God exists and is daily adding to the invisible church of born-again believers through the proclamation of the gospel and the working of the Holy Spirit in the heart and mind of the elect, then what you say is simple apostasy. I will continue to believe the Scriptures and be a light to the world whilst loving and doing good - even to my enemies.

[NormATive]

For the mature believer with a robust Christian worldview, right doctrine will produce right living that leads to flourishing both spiritually and practically that ultimately yields much good in the here and now. I am reminded of C.S Lewis' words: "Aim for heaven and you'll get earth thrown in"

That doesn't spare us from the immature believers following wrong doctrine, or the right doctrine for the wrong reasons. That's the problem with so-called "right doctrine" - no one really knows for sure exactly what it is. There has been too much harm done in the world for all the fools who think they own "right doctrine."

Yes the problem of evil causes many to fall away from the faith they profess.

In the case of the Shoah, it was the Faith that fell away from the faithful. There was no salvation; there was no comeuppance for evil. If it weren't for the Allies, Hitler would have surely wiped Jews from the face of the earth. That was not G-d - that was President Roosevelt.

Here's a moral dilemma for you: if there is a such thing as "right doctrine," and of course; you think Jews don't follow it because we reject Jesus, would it be morally correct for Hitler to have accomplished wiping us out? Perhaps the United States actually subverted G-d's correct doctrinal plan.

Often times when undergoing suffering many tend to lose sight of an eternal perspective. Others will go through the fire and come out the other side saying: "What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?" (Rom. 8:31).

I'll remember that when your people are ushered into gas chambers.

If you find yourself cloistered in a self-righteous bubble, most likely you don't have right doctrine to begin with.

That's what they all say.

Well if God exists and is daily adding to the invisible church of born-again believers through the proclamation of the gospel and the working of the Holy Spirit in the heart and mind of the elect...

G-d help us all!

I will continue to believe the Scriptures and be a light to the world whilst loving and doing good - even to my enemies.

Who are your enemies?

NORM

[Doug Shaver]

For the mature believer with a robust Christian worldview, right doctrine will produce right living that leads to flourishing both spiritually and practically that ultimately yields much good in the here and now.

So, as long as I know what right living looks like, all I need to do is find some Christians living that way and ask what they believe, if I want to know what the right doctrine is?

[seanD]

One thing I was surprised to learn upon my conversion to Judaism was how they were quite open about the evolution of their faith over the millennia.

One Rabbi described it as abrogating bad religion.

As a Christian, I was always taught that Jesus (whom we believed was God) was the same yesterday, today and forever - unchanging, unyielding. Like a rock; unmovable and timeless.

The implication being that what the Bible teaches is also unchanging, unyielding and timeless. I would interpret this as meaning the basic tenets of the faith are (were) the same as they were 2,000 years ago.

I am currently reading How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee, by Bart Ehrman. In this book, Mr. Ehrman illustrates how the idea of Jesus evolved over a specific time period between the middle of the second century CE up to the fourth. The issue in question was the exact nature of Jesus' divinity.

In the early years after Jesus' death, he was viewed as an exalted human who became God after his resurrection from the dead. Ehrman shows how this idea of exaltation changed over time from happening at the resurrection to happening at his baptism and finally at the advent of his birth.

By the time of the fourth Gospel, the exaltation of Jesus evolves into pre-existing deification; that is - Jesus was divine from the beginning of time, and not at his birth, baptism or resurrection as the earlier Gospels reveal.

Even this kind of divinity evolves into what we now know as the Trinitarian view.

All throughout these centuries, as the view of Jesus evolves; previous views of Jesus are deemed heresy - such as the earliest Christian community's view of an exalted human Jesus.

So, my question is; can the Christian faith evolve even further, or is the current orthodox view (trinitarianism, blood atonement salvation, original sin, etc.) set in stone?

NORM

Only there's a flaw in your chronology. Paul, who I'm certain Ehrman would vehemently insist came way before the gospels, was the first to establish some of the richest Christological tradition that even, in some cases, went beyond the theology expressed in the gospels. And Paul answered to the Jerusalem church when it came to the doctrine he preached (Galatians 2), where we can assume the movement first began, hence, Paul's Christology reflects the first remnants of what came out of Jerusalem. Strange that Ehrman doesn't know this (of course, I'm assuming he doesn't address this since I haven't read the book).

[robrecht]

Only there's a flaw in your chronology. Paul, who I'm certain Ehrman would vehemently insist came way before the gospels, was the first to establish some of the richest Christological tradition that even, in some cases, went beyond the theology expressed in the gospels. And Paul answered to the Jerusalem church when it came to the doctrine he preached (Galatians 2), where we can assume the movement first began, hence, Paul's Christology reflects the first remnants of what came out of Jerusalem. Strange that Ehrman doesn't know this (of course, I'm assuming he doesn't address this since I haven't read the book).

Ehrman has changed his mind and has joined the Early High Christology Club, asserting an early high christology as pre-Pauline, namely a divine, pre-existent Christ, but believes that for Paul this was more likely some kind of angel christology, with Christ being the principal or highest created divine being or principal agent of God, and he sees this as arising out of a Jewish matrix where there is various kinds of talk of a second divine being that deserves worship, eg, Wisdom as an agent of creation. He goes back and forth on just how high this very early divine angel christology might have been in theological terms. In his most recent book, he interprets 1 Cor 8,6 as indeed affirming that Christ was the instrument of all creation, which is about as divine as divine gets if you do not understand this as a kind of evil demiurge, and Ehrman does not see Paul as a gnostic.

For us there is one God, the Father,
from whom are all things and for whom we exist,
and one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (1 Cor. 8: 6)

But, he also admits elsewhere that he goes back and forth on how to best interpret 1 Cor 8,6. At times, he will say 1 Cor 8,6 is best understood as 'all things exist now through Christ because he is the sovereign Lord who sustains the entire universe'.

[shunyadragon]

One thing I was surprised to learn upon my conversion to Judaism was how they were quite open about the evolution of their faith over the millennia.

One Rabbi described it as abrogating bad religion.

As a Christian, I was always taught that Jesus (whom we believed was God) was the same yesterday, today and forever - unchanging, unyielding. Like a rock; unmovable and timeless.

The implication being that what the Bible teaches is also unchanging, unyielding and timeless. I would interpret this as meaning the basic tenets of the faith are (were) the same as they were 2,000 years ago.

I am currently reading How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee, by Bart Ehrman. In this book, Mr. Ehrman illustrates how the idea of Jesus evolved over a specific time period between the middle of the second century CE up to the fourth. The issue in question was the exact nature of Jesus' divinity.

In the early years after Jesus' death, he was viewed as an exalted human who became God after his resurrection from the dead. Ehrman shows how this idea of exaltation changed over time from happening at the resurrection to happening at his baptism and finally at the advent of his birth.

By the time of the fourth Gospel, the exaltation of Jesus evolves into pre-existing deification; that is - Jesus was divine from the beginning of time, and not at his birth, baptism or resurrection as the earlier Gospels reveal.

Even this kind of divinity evolves into what we now know as the Trinitarian view.

All throughout these centuries, as the view of Jesus evolves; previous views of Jesus are deemed heresy - such as the earliest Christian community's view of an exalted human Jesus.

So, my question is; can the Christian faith evolve even further, or is the current orthodox view (trinitarianism, blood atonement salvation, original sin, etc.) set in stone?

NORM

Actually if Christianity would evolve beyond these original doctrines and dogmas, it would no longer be Christianity. It would be the Baha'i Faith, which believes in the natural cyclic evolving nature of human spirituality and human knowledge, which parallels our natural human physical evolution and the cyclic evolving nature of our physical existence.

Attempts to change and adapt to the changing world around us in Christianity ends up with more and more churches, some change some do not. Some reject the Trinity, like JW, and some try to shoehorn science into the mix creating more contradictions, but no if Christianity changed and evolved concerning the basic orthodoxy it would no longer be Christianity.