Atheists wanting to burn the Origin of the Species
Ray Comfort is giving out 1,000 books on 100 campuses, including Wisconsin’s own UW-Madison.
In November of 2009, we will be giving away more than 100,000 copies of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species at 100 top U.S. universities (other individuals and churches have purchased approximately 70,000 copies to also give to students). This will be the entire publication (304-pages). Nothing has been removed from Darwin’s original work. As usual with reprints of On the Origin of Species (there have been over 140 reprints), there will be an Introduction. My name will be on the cover (for those who think that we are somehow being deceptive). In one day, 170,000 future doctors, lawyers and politicians will freely get information about Intelligent Design (and the gospel) placed directly into their hands!
What do atheists think about this?
* “Perhaps we should just call for a book burning!”
* “In this instance, I would advocate book-burning.”
* “I’m not into burning books, but this one deserves to be.”
* “Anyone up for a large bonfire?”
ShareThisCommenting at the Crosstalk Blog is not a right, it is a privilege. Crosstalk Blog staff reserves the right to reject any comment that is found to be offensive or otherwise unaccaeptable for any reason. We will not tolerate the following: abusive or profane language, objectionable links, off-topic remarks, and bickering with other commenters. Thank you for respecting this policy.
35 Responses to “Atheists wanting to burn the Origin of the Species”
Leave a Reply
To share this post, click the "share page" on the bar at the bottom of the screen.
Latest Crosstalk Shows- Your Body Is Your I.D. - Biometrics and Your Freedom
- The Third American Revolution
- National Security Feedback
- Beck Rally Causes More Evangelical Confusion
- Best of Crosstalk (First Aired August 23, 2010)
- Controversial End-of-Life Case in Canada
- Domesticated Jesus?
- Homocon Update
- No Fear of God in Evangelical Churches
- Following Glenn Beck's Divine Destiny or God's Word?
And they say we Christians have “blind allegiance to our dogma”. Don't see a whole bunch of Baptists throwing Richard Dawkins new book into a huge bonfire singing hymns. Nope, we can welcome open criticisms (in fact we welcome it) and will happily debate the issues. But these atheists…… don't like to play with the same ball.
Who said that evolution was not a religion. I should have read your post before writing mine, which I called “Why do the Heathen Rage.”
I have yet to witness a justifiable book burning.
Am I reading something wrong or does the article say that Comfort is giving out copies of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species? This can be found in public domain easily. It isn’t a big secret. I am certain Comfort will offer pamphlets and other material explaining why Darwin was wrong in some matters. That isn’t a big secret either. Freud was wrong on some points, so was Galileo. Being the first step toward a breakthrough matters even if the scientist/philosopher is wrong on some points because science is built upon the shoulders of giants. One cannot just through out a whole body of evidence because a few things were unknown or wrong.
Science is not my area and I am no expert, but neither is Comfort (I’ve heard his debate). Think of science as the ocean with all of those rivers of experimentation collecting data as they flow into the body of science. It is a growing body as new discoveries are made.
OKay, now is this the: “I focus on Jesus for salvation”, Jaime or the “I focus on harmony with the world for salavation”, Jaime?
I'll know “IT's” happened to you when you start defending defenders of the faith as passionately as you defend bashers of the faith.
Why so bitter? Odds are it's because of some mean old church junk that you grew up on.
Low and behold! Jaime and I agree on something! Someone call Guiness Book. This is one for the records…
When you said, “I have yet to witness a justifiable book burning”, I could not help but agree with you. I do not like book burnings because the fire gets all of the attention. I would rather see a series of sermons explaining why a symbolic book burning might be appropriate.
However, the rest of what you say, Jaime, is gobblygook. I agree with JSRose. You may have your faith in a 'Jesus” different from the one in the Holy Bible. I do not see how else you can continually defend the lost and berate the saved.
BTW, Ronald Reagan's last name is spelled R-E-A-G-A-N. Learn it and respect it because he is likely the last real American president we will ever have.
Peace out,
T.
Who am I defending? I am not bitter, you only think that because you disagree with me. I do not understand this litmus test that says “real” followers of Jesus fall in line with conservative politics. As if Jesus is not good enough, I must be a fan of Reagan and Ray Comfort, too.
The most interesting part is that many who come to these burnings buy things to burn. I am certain those selling Marilyn Manson CDs and Harry Potter books would rather you buy and burn rather than not buy at all.
No, you don't have to be a fan of any man….but at least Ray Comfort is very busy doing something to win the lost. What are YOU doing…..(except criticizing)?
I see defence of Darwin. But what about the testimony of the Lord God. In the begining God created the heaven's and the Earth. The question you need to ask yourself is do I believe God's on testimony or do I believe a man who faciltated a lie of the devil which has led to the murder of untold million's. Darwin was a child of the devil. His own testimony proves that. Where anywhere people have embraced this lie of evolution. There has been nothing but death and destruction. John 10:10 ” The thief comes not but to steal,kill, and destroy, but I have come to give you life and to give it to you more abundantly”. Look at the testimony of the Lord Jesus. He alone gives Life for He is life and the Author of it. Yet people would rather believe the lie of satan over the Truth of God's written word. It all boils down you either believe the authority of scripture or you do not.
Who are you defending? You always defend ANYthing or ANYone that is in rebellion against the authority or righteousness of a holy God. Don't take my word for it, read your own comments. God doesn't want to force some kind of control over you (that's the other spirit), He wants you to come to Him and allow Him to love you as your Father. As I've tried to explain to you before-who cares if I “disagree” with you? God is absolute truth and our opinions and whether or not we agree with it (His truth) is meaningless. You claim you're not bitter and then rant about “conservative politics”, which no one except you ever talks about. This site is NOT a political debate and you want to devert attention away from your own spiritual confusion by making it it one (political debate). The jesus that you are a “fan” of or “focus on” is not the One that died for you. You've been had by a demonic poser. The real Jesus warned us about that. And since you insist on talking about Ronald Reagan-I loved him and I miss him and I won't apologize for it. He was a real man and he didn't compromise with our enemies. He loved America and it's pretty obvious that he was the last true patriot that will ever reside in the White House. Gee, the same things that make me admire him are the same things that make you loathe him. You are going to be an awesome warrior for God when that veil of darkness is lifted from you!
Wow! Agreement numero dos! If people are buying stuff just to burn it…where is the logic to that? This proves my point about the fire being the drawing card and not the reason for the fire. If people only want to be part of the party without repenting and burning their tools of divination, sorcery, and other unGodliness…they are missing the point entirely.
Have you been to burnings before? I have only heard of them.
Yes, I've been to a few, but not since I was kid. Back then these events were held as part of revivals with different churches sponsoring. The sponsors were usually of the Pentecostal vein, but sometimes Baptist, too. They would pass around large baskets for people to throw their “satanic” items into and I remember coveting the rock albums and books as that basket passed by me. The preachers would usually yowl about Satan feeling pain as the items burned. I considered it an interesting show as a middle schooler, but now I suspect I would feel outrage and nausea.
I criticize Comfort for being misinformed. At least do your homework and be able to support your position with facts.
I hope God is using Comfort to bring people to Him. It isn’t really Comfort that matters, or me or you, but that we allow God to use us as a tool in this world to draw people closer to Him. I am utterly wretched except for God, but that doesn’t stop me from calling something bull when it seems like bull, and Comfort and many of these other television/radio/book deal preachers seem to be peddling bull. They draw more attention to themselves than to God. They are “christian” celebrities.
Jaime,
If you look back through history, you will see that God has raised up certain people through out generations that have influenced the church to uncompromising truth and holiness. People like: John Owen, George Whitefield, Charles Spurgeon, William Booth, Billy Graham, Adrian Rogers and now in this day people like Ray Comfort. I have met Ray and can tell you he is no phoney. If you were to look back through history you would find that many of these messengers used by God were rather unorthodox in their presentation like Billy Sunday who would do back flips to illustrate a point. Ray is the real deal. Are you ?
In what way is Ray misinformed? He is a 'celebrity preacher'?….'peddling bull'? What 'bull' is he peddling? He is presenting clearly the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. What problem do you have with that? Surely, you don't think the gospel is 'bull'. Just because he has become well known through his books/evangelism training programs…you call him a celebrity like he is doing something that is self-serving…that he is in it for personal gain. There ARE many preachers of the 'prosperity' gospel today who do fit your description/criticism,.. but Ray is not one of them. His heart is to simply serve God and to win the lost. Through his radio,tv programs, books, etc., he has encouraged Christians to get out and share their faith effectively. I am one of those… went from rarely witnessing to witnessing regularly…because of Ray's ministry. I am just amazed you have a problem with that. Tell me exactly what YOU are doing. You side stepped that issue completely, didn't you?
I have shot my mouth off too quickly (unfortunately this is not an uncommon occurrence). I wasn’t even thinking specifically of Comfort when I spoke about phonies. This is probably a personal view with me rather than a far-reaching, all encompassing view. I just do not gain much from most of the television/radio evangelists. There are nuggets of truth to be found, but one must wade through a great deal of “bull.”
I think it is good that Comfort encourages others to speak out about their faith, but I hope that most people who take on the mantle of teaching the faith are better informed about what they are talking about than Comfort. As I have pointed out, science is not my area of study, but I know enough to recognize the misinformation that Comfort often proposes in his debates against evolution. I am also discouraged by his ploys when it comes to sharing the Gospel. It bothers me when we are told that we should trick people into conversion. You may not share this opinion, but it seems to me that Comfort tries to make Christians into sales people who trick the customer into buying Christianity.
I understand that you are a fan of Comfort. I didn't mean to challenge your fandom and I am sorry if I got you all fired up.
No 'fandom', Jamie. You are accusing me of making a man into an idol. Ray is a minister of the gospel and, as such, he has ministered to me….like my own pastor does as well…and John MacArthur thru his sermons downloads, Matthew Henry's commentaries, and many others I could mention. Men used of God…not idols we worship in place of God as you are trying to make out.
STILL no answer to my question….what are YOU doing to share the gospel with the lost? Easy to criticize someone like Ray who is doing it though, isn't it?
He is 'tricking people into conversion'?! He does just the opposite! He presents the gospel just the way Jesus did…(remember the Samaritan woman at the well )..presenting the law first so people can see they are sinners..they haven't kept the 10 commandments and are in NEED of a savior. Once they understand that, and if that concerns them…then the gospel of grace is presented. Without understanding the law and our failure to keep it, we can never understand how desperate our condition is or appreciate what Christ has done for us at the cross. Would you rather have him use the easy believism approach…'God has a wonderful plan for your life'? Now THAT is the way to turn Christians “into sales people and tricking the customer into buying Christianity”….a false christianity. He never encourages Christians to force a salvation decision from a person…doesn't even care for praying the sinner's prayer with people. The gospel message is presented,the person is told what they need to do to be saved…no pressure to make a decision. What happens after the witnessing encounter is up to the person and the work of the Holy Spirit. How could you have a problem with that? Do you just like being contrary…is this a game to you? Are you a born again Christian, Jamie?
Perhaps if you could share more about what your beliefs are, we could understand better how you are coming at this.
By the way, I agree that there are many tv/radio evangelists who present a 'great deal of bull'. But that is not true of all. I could recommend several with 'no bull'…just gospel truth plainly presented…John MacArthur, Alstair Begg, J. Vernon McGee are a few who come to mind. Can't judge everyone by what some do and paint them all with the same brush.
Wow. I know you all say this isn't about celebrity fandom, but my inbox was filled this morning with Disqus messages flaming me for speaking badly of Comfort. I didn't even say anything that bad, I just do not agree with Comfort's methods and I think he needs to take a college freshman level biology class.
Now I know how Ingrid must feel when she criticizes Rob Bell or whoever the “it-pastor” en vogue is and gets vitriol flung her way from rabid fans. I doubt Comfort cares about what I think or feels you guys need to advocate for him. I am sorry to have upset you all.
I guess I am having a hard time understanding what (specifically) you disagree with Ray about. Could you be more specific as to the methods you disagree with? You just keep making blanket statements like 'he is pedaling bull' or that he uses 'ploys' to 'trick' people into salvation. That is just totally false as we have alread tried to explain. It not a matter of 'fandom'…it is a matter of defending a brother in Christ who is working hard to reach the lost. He is not perfect and above criticism…of course not…far from it…none of us are. But he IS out in world of unbelievers doing something…unlike so many Christians today. Constructive criticism is helpful. But the statements you have made are based either on prejudice or misunderstanding more than on fact. Give us something solid that we can truly discuss here…not just general statements referring to 'bull'.
How ever imperfect you may feel his presentation to be (scientifically) in the intro to Origins, at least the gospel IS being presented to people who may never read it in a Bible. He is getting the message 'out there'. Sure, some will be offended by it…but not all. If there is a chance just a few souls get saved, isn't it worth it?
I don't blindly follow any Christian preacher/leader holding them up to be beyond fault. Constructive criticism is something they/we all need and it is helpful. But just throwing out barbs that have no real substance is not helpful…it only tears down and discourages. Perhaps you have valid concerns…so far I haven't been able to understand what they are.
If you disagree with Comfort's techniques, tell us specifically where he is wrong and what you would do differently to win the lost. We would like to know. Maybe Comfort would benefit from your insights as well. The goal should be to build up a brother in the Lord…he IS a true brother…rather than tear down.
Johannes,
You say about Ray Comfort “concerning his stance on evolution I have to say he is either ignorant or simply a liar.”
Ray is out there everyday on the front lines fighting for the heart and souls of men. He is one of the most biblically accurate teachers of our time. If you knew and understand the authority of Scripture, Jaime and yourself would not make such a claim. If science contradicts Scripture, scientist do not yet have all the facts.
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolishness the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe? Are you placing your faith in the wisdom of man?
I do know and understand the authority of scripture, thank you very much. I do NOT need you to lecture me on divine inspiration. I'm frankly sick of people trying to win an argument by playing the “you have to read it the way the big me does it”-card.
The thing is: science does not necessarily contradict scripture. It's a fatal dichotomy Mr. Comfort makes. As far as I understand his theology, he says that one cannot be a Christian and come to the final conclusion that the earth is millions of years old and life was formed through evolutionary processes.
This is plainly and simply wrong. Period. There is a certain smugness and I must say arrogance about the way Mr. Comfort presents his argument that makes me squirm on the inside. What's his point? Trying to win people to Christ or trying to prove the superiority of evangelic fundamentalist reasoning? Often it looks more like the latter. Then again, his arguments are full of faulty logic and poor research (I mentioned the banana already, did I? To be fair to Mr. Comfort, he apologized for that). He pretends to be a master of apologetics but he is more of a logical trickster. He pretends to be in the intellectual league of Richard Dawkins… but he is not. That's what really riles me up about him.
John Piper believes in YEC. Ravi Zacharias believes in YEC. They are very open and clear about that. They're also incredibly humble about that, too. Mr. Comfort tries to paint anyone who believes in creation as evil (or soon to be evil) fool.
I'm very certain that he severely misrepresents the gospel with his strategy. “Evolutionists” are not stupid. “Evolutionists” are not necessarily immoral. The “Evolution or Creation” debate is not at the core of the gospel. Not at all. Not even near it.
It's all about God becoming man and saving us by taking our sin upon himself. Christian soteriology works without YEC so stop pretending it's a matter of life or death.
/rant out
No, of course she is not accountable to me, but we all are to God. I was just trying to point out that talk is cheap… taking real action to win the lost is something very few Christians actually do. Being critical of those who making that effort it is easier than doing it yourself, isn't it? She was very critical of Ray, but not being specific so I could understand what she had a problem with. At least you have filled in the blanks a little with your post though I don't agree with you. I think it is unfair to call Ray a liar. You are slandering the man and you have no real evidence of that. Wouldn't it defeat the purpose of trying of to win the lost to blatantly lie to people? Now if you disagree with his approach in witnessing to athetists, why don't you enlighten us as to what he needs to do or say differently to be more effective? I am sure, if you have some good suggestions, Ray would be open to hearing them. Is winning the lost a real priority for you? If so, then tell us how you would witness and win the lost amongst the scientific, athetistic crowd. I am hearing criticisms, but no constructive suggestions yet. I don't think you have a right to criticize unless you have something better to offer… unless you aren't actually interested in soul winning and just like arguing from science the existence of God. I think it is the later. I think I have about had it with discussion on this topic. It is going nowhere.
Johannes,
What's YEC stand for? You Encourage Creation?
I FINALLY get what you have a problem with. Ray can believe as he chooses to about young earth creation, but it is wrong to suppose that those who believe in old earth are not true believers, and you feel it is wrong for him to use the YEC as an evangelism tool. I got ya now. I have to admit I am not read up on this controversy. I WILL read up on it though. Nevertheless, I think that God can use what Ray is doing to reach lost people…even if Ray, as you say, if wrong. God can use even the foolishness and mistakes of men for his good purpose. It is the Holy Spirit afterall who works in men's heart to convert them. I think God will bless his efforts…inspite of how you or I feel about it. The gospel if going out there to people who may not otherwise take note of it.
I really do take issue with you calling Ray a liar. He has a different view from you, but he truly loves the Lord and feels called to what he is doing. Namecalling just turns people off to your viewpoint and denigrates the discussion.
I guess I have to clarify something: I do not believe Mr. Comfort to be a liar. If I wasn't clear on that statement I have to apologize. I'm giving him the benefit of doubt a fellow believer in the Lord deserves.
However I have to say that I think he's being intellectually lazy in his arguments. He does not give any source for the atheist's quotes. Did he get them from his hatemail? Read them on an internet forum? Are they in any way representative for the general reception of his book? IMHO he is painting the atheistic “community” with a brush that's waaaayy to broad.
“He has a different view from you, but he truly loves the Lord and feels called to what he is doing.”
I readily believe this. And I also readily believe that there are many people who will hear his message and turn to the gospel. I believe the same thing to be true for Jack Chick tracts. Even for this blog I believe that there will be people who find the Gospel behind those messages. People hear Rick Warren's or Brian McLaren's or Rob Bell's sermons and turn to the Lord. People probably even turn to the Lord after hearing a Joel Osteen sermon. We are still called to discern and to be reasonably critical.
You know you are so right about that. I actually came to the Lord after reading a book by Norman Vincent Peale. I doubt I would agree with him on very many things today. But there was one sentence in his book (Power of Positive Thinking) that jumped out at me with a truth I had never known. He said that if I had been the only person on the face of the earth, Christ still would have come down and died just for me. I had never heard that before…it bowled me over…. I couldn't get that sentence out of my mind. That one sentence was the turning point in my life. Amazing. God can use anything and anyone. We just can't put Him in a box.
This has been a good discussion. I really wasn't aware of the problems some Christians were having over the YEC vs the OE. This is something I need to investigate more…read both sides of the issue so I can understand just where you are coming from in your disappointment with Ray's approach. I just see him sharing the gospel boldly and that encourages me so much. Let's all pray together that his efforts will reap souls regardless of our views on his approach.
Been thinking….I have a question for those Christians who believe in the Old Earth theory of creation…that millions of years of evolution took place. Please help me on this one. Doesn't the Bible teach that death came into the world as the direct result of Adams' fall? Sin entered the world and with it came death, right? Sin affected all creation so all creatures since the Fall grow old, suffer, and die…part of God's righteous judgment. (Rom 6:23: 'The wages of sin is death'.) So, help me understand this…what happened to all those people and creatures who were evolving over millions of years? They must have… died…right? If the less evolved people and creatures (and pre-historic animals like dinosaurs) that lived before Adam suffered and died (they must have!), then God would have to be an unjust God and an ogre to have allowed all those innocent people and creatures to die. He must have watched it all happen and was indifferent to all their suffering. (Would you call that a loving Creator?) What other explanation can there be? I am just curious about how you resolve this problem. The biblical story of the Fall just doesn't make sense in the concext of evolution so I am wondering how you can believe science over the Bible. Now..don't hit me over the head for bringing up this little problem. Maybe you OE'ers can explain it all away. I don't know. But I just can't see how God could be a just, loving God if He just looked the other way for millions of years allowing death to overtake the world before there was any rebellion. It just doesn't make sense or fit with God's true character as revealed in His Word.
The difficulty is simple. You read Genesis as if it is an actual, fact-based account. Step by step of what happened. Many Christians do not. You take a part of the bible that was never understood to be literal by the Jews as something THEY NEVER would have foreseen. Here is the difficult part. Too many evangelicals have bought into this viewpoint that if the Bible isn't literally true at all times, it lacks authority. Unfortunately, that is a pagan view of Scripture. George Barna argues about similar issues in his book Pagan Christianity. The idea that a story be “fact-based” (a creation of rationalists, by the way) before it has authority in the evangelical community is scary. This is a product of 18th Century Enlightenment philosophy, and a trap that too many evangelicals fall into. It presumes that something must pass the 'scientific method' before we can acknowledge it is true. This is why we have Evangelicals stumbling about trying to prove the Old Testament as if it was a science paper. It is not! It is Scripture, and it does not need to be fact based to be true. Enlightenment philosophy purposely removed God (teleology) from its frame of reference, thereby creating a plausibility structure where Christians feel they must prove God and fact as if they are the same thing.
And as to God and millions of years, why not? And who said they died? Speaking of which, how does that then fit with the idea of hell and eternal torment. (Which the Jews never believed.) God will burn billions of people for eternity? Really? Think about what you're saying…
Thanks for repying, Stephen. I do appreciate it, but you never really answered my question. I don't understand what you call a 'fact-based' argument about the Bible. I don't look at the Bible and try to prove it to be true by any scientific method or human reasoning. To me, it is God's Word inspired by the Holy Spirit. I accept what it says as literal truth. I just believe it 'as is'. (Also, I am not a fan of George Barna so I probably won't be swayed by any his of arguments.)
Do you mean to tell me you don't believe in a literal hell or eternal torment? You have read the teachings of Jesus, I'm sure. It doesn't matter what the Jews believed about hell…what matters is what Jesus taught. Jesus talked about it over and over again. I think he even mentioned hell more times than he did heaven. (Matt 5:22, 29,30, Matt 10: 28, Luke 12: 5…just a few references.) Luke 9: 47-48 seems especially convincing, “to be cast into hell fire where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” So I guess you think Jesus wasn't speaking literally , huh? A bit of allegory on his part? Man! I would hate to be wrong on that one.
I HAVE thought about it and… I believe what the Bible plainly teaches…yes, people (billions perhaps) will burn for eternity because they transgressed the Law offending a Holy God, and refused the offer of forgiveness God provided in the suffering and death of His Son. (Matt:7:13-14 says “narrow is the gate…which leads to life and few there be that find it.”) Just because it doesn't fit your human idea of justice, you can throw out what the Bible says? And, if you really think about it…no one has to go to hell…no one. Everyone who ends up there will have chosen it by their rejection of God's gift..His only Son. He came so no would HAVE to go there…but sadly people will chose hell instead of repenting and living for Christ.
And you think all the people (and animals) who were evolving for millions of years up to the time of Adam and Eve did not die?! That is pretty crazy…where are they then?..on Mars? They DID die and, that they did, doesn't line up with what the Bible teaches. The Bible says the wages of sin is death. Death came into the world only AFTER Adam sinned…not before. So the earth can't be old and people couldn't have evolved over millions of years. If the Bible isn't true just the way it was written….literally.. then that means people can just interpret it different ways…depending on their particular 'feeling' about a matter. I don't 'feel' God would damn billions of people to an endless hell, so I will just ignore what Jesus said about it…. He must have been talking in riddles … we can't take Him literally on THAT subject.
God can do anything. If He said He created the world in 7 days, I believe Him and, when you go on to read the rest of the Bible, Old and New Testaments, it all fits together perfectly. I just don't understand Christians who believe in OE…seems like they place science (man's understanding) ahead of the Bible.
wearymom2,
(As a trainer, I'm hoping you're getting some rest!) Thanks for responding, and I'll try to get to your questions/comments one at a time. It's probably best you udnerstand a few things. I was a Pentecostal pastor and have been involved in ministry of some kind for many years. I'm finishing my M. Div at the largest Evnagelical Seminary in Canada, and my undergraduate degree is in Theology from a conservative Bible College. I love Jesus and believe that He is the Son of God. I believe God created the wolrd, although how He did it remains a mystery to me. Okay, so let's talk about what you say when you say that you don't apply scientific understanding to the Bible, but merely accept it as it is written in English. There are a couple of points here. First, the Bible was not originally written in English, it was written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. It has been translated, and sometimes poorly. Also, the Bible was not written at once, but over thousands of years, and the meanings of certain words simply do not translate easily from Hebrew to English or from Greek to English. There are many examples of this, especially in older translations such as the King James version, which was written early in the 17th Century. That the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible I have no doubt, but that doesn't mean there hasn't been human error in the translations. The other thing to understand is that while the Bible is for us, it wasn't written to us. What I mean by that is the culture of 1st Century REome and old Israel were very different from the world of today. For example, if you were to tell a young person a story from your childhood, they might not get it. Why? Not because the language was different, but because they woukldn't understand the culture and time that you grew up in. And that was only thirty years ago in the same country. Imagine what that means when you cross thousands of years and a different culture! The job of theologians is to help people understand these differences by learning and studying the time and original language. They are the ones who translate the Bible into English and other languages.
Now, one of the translations that does not work so well is the word 'hell.' In the Greek, it doesn't exist. It is “Shayol Gul”, among other things. The concept of hell developed through the centuries. It was not an early church assumption. But the English translation, along with all that we've heard about it from so many through the last couple of centuries, makes it seems obvious, doesn't it.
As to Creation. In the Old Testament, we can not take these stories as literal. And I'll tell you why. It isn't that they didn't happen necessarily. Its that the Ancient way of telling stories focused less on the 'exact facts' and more on the significance of the event. The Genesis story is not written as a compilation of facts. That's a Greek idea. Hebrews understood their history in terms of the significance of the event, and it had no bearing whatsoever in their faith of an almighty God! To read Genesis as a historical book is to misread it. It would be the same as reading the book of Psalms as a cookbook…. that wasn't why it was written. It doesn't diminish it however, but makes it even greater! Especially when you compare it to other Ancient cultures and their Creation accounts!
It isn't a matter of believing God, but understanding the story. You're right, God can do anything! If he chose to take a million years or six thousand what difference does it make! We love Him still, right!
Now, when you say that people can simply interpret it the way they want if it isn't literal is a bit of a fallacy. By that, I mean its impossible. You are interpreting the Bible the way you want. 500 years ago they interpreted the Bible completely differently. In other countries, they still interpret the Bible differently. They don't live here, in North America, in 2009. Their cultures and customs are very different, so how they read the Bible will be different, right? Now, you say you interpret the Bible 'literally'. So here's my question. Is slavery right? Is it part of God's plan? Because many people in the 19th Century told William Wilberforce that the Bible, if read literally, supported slavery!! (The book of Philemon) Now you dopn't think slavery is part of God's plan, right? Well, now you're not interpreting the Bible literally, because you've handpicked verses you disagree with. Okay, what about women? Should women wear hats and be silent? Paul says that women should do that as well? So you see, we all hand pick verses, so NO ONE interprets the Bible literally.
Listen, its difficult. Its SOOO much easier when we can selfishly read the Bible as if is directed to me, here in North America in 2009 without doing any homework. But it wasn't. It was written for every person in every culture, which means God asks us to do OUR part. And some of that is displaying the humility He requires in knowing that we may not have it right.
My challenge to you is to not take the easy path, but to take the the more difficult road of learning and understanding what the Bible is about. God wrote to us in story form for a reason. He did not give us a book of rules, but a wonderful story collection of how He interacted and interacts with us. They are not to be read simply as rules or “facts”, because that would be too easy. Instead, they are designed for us to peruse for our lifetimes, increasing both our love and humility as we move towards Christlikeness…
Much love
Stephen
What you describe of your beliefs reminds me of gnosticism…relying on intellect apart from faith… thinking that the Bible is so complicated, so over translated that the common man can not understand it. It is so complicated in fact…it will take a lifetime to understand it and even that will not be sufficient enough time. Good grief…if that is the case..nobody could ever get saved! Though it is true that the English translation is not an absolutely exact translation, it is bogos to say it was understood differently 500 years ago. We still read what Luther discovered and our understanding of it is the same. St Augustine held to the same understanding of the gospel message that we have today. John 14:26 says the Holy Spirit will be our teacher. He will lead us in understanding the Scriptures. 1John 2:20,27 tell us that we have an anointing within.. that we need that no man teach us. The Holy Spirit witnesses to us what is truth (He is the Spirit of Truth) and what are lies. Once you begin to discredit the Word for whatever reason you are moving into the realm of human understanding….and away from truth.
Why on earth would God give us the Bible and then make it so complicated for the average person to read and understand? This is what I was taught as a Catholic. We were discouraged from reading the Bible because we were told we couldn't understand it. We needed the priest to explain it to us. But that is false! Any man…anyone, anywhere…can read it and find eternal life therein. That is what happened to me! It doesn't take a Master of Divinity or even a high school education. It takes a heart open to hear what God is saying. I doubt very much you are attending a 'conservative Bible college'. Your ideas sound very emergent to me…'we can't really know anything for sure…everything is a big mystery and we have to keep working to figure it all out'. That is not biblical Christianity. I am sure you are sincere but you can be sincerely wrong. I say this in love…because even former Pentecostal pastors can be wrong…and unsaved.
As to hell, regardless of where the word originated, the way Jesus described it makes it obvious that it is a literal place of eternal punishment. Men reject a belief in hell because it does not fit the human idea of justice. How could a loving God damn people to suffer for eternity? Isn't that cruel of Him? We think this way because we are sinners who do not fully understand the frightening holiness of God or the awful ugliness of even just one sin…let alone millions committed over a lifetime. We all do deserve hell…everyone of us. But God, in His great mercy, sent His own Son to suffer and die in our place taking our punishment so we don't have to go there. Rejecting that amazing gift is the most heinous of all sins…the unforgiveable sin…hell is the just punishment for rejecting the sacrifice of the Son. If there is no hell…God is not a just God. If He is not just, He is not good.
You say you love Jesus…but why? What has He done to make you love Him so? What has he saved you from? Why did He come to earth? What made Him suffer and die? Why would He go through all of that if there is no hell to save us from?
I doubt I am going to convince you of anything or change your mind. But, Stephen, put down mens' books (like Gallop's Pagan Christianity). Forget everything that has been drummed into your head by professors. Just pick up your Bible and begin reading asking God to reveal to you what His truth is. Read it, reread it until you hear from God. He WILL speak truth to you through His Word..'as is'..(regardless of the imperfect translation). Any man with an open humble heart can hear what He has to say…today. Just you alone with His Word…it is enough! 2 Tim 3:16 “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”
I have enjoyed discussing this with you. May God bless you and lead you into all truth.
Hi Wearymom,
I have read your comment a few times, and as always, do my best to be open to what others say. Your comment about gnosticism is a good one, I think. You're right about intellectualizing faith, it is a paradox, isn't it. And I wasn't telling you about the translations to point out my education or indicate that Scripture is too hard for someone to understand. See, I agree with you! The story of the Incarnation, of Jesus coming to earth for us, of God becoming man, is easy to translate! The reason that God gave us story, the Bible is narrative, is that story crosses boundaries, doesn't it? Story is how we humans relate to the world. No, my difficult lies with what you call 'biblical Christianity'. (That is a condescending and insulting term to many Christians by the way, as if only those who think they are literalists have it all figured out, so they're version of Christianity is biblical, much like gnostics, but I digress) Evangelicals take the beauty of Scripture (The Bible is not God's Word. I'm sorry, but that is just not true. Not historically, nor culturally, nor when properly exegeted. John is not talking about the Bible when he talks about the 'Word of God.' ) and cut it into thousands of pieces, and pick out the verses they want to emphasize. I don't understand it. The whole notion of being 'born again' is from a single verse! How is that 'biblical?!' Paul talks about working out our salvation day by day, and yet somehow evangelicals have turned that into a 'decision for Christ', something you do once when people are playing soothing music in a group setting. (The infamously unbiblical 'altar' call. Tell me again where that is present in the early church?)
I apologize for sounding frustrated. I, too, once believed as you did. Some times i wish I could go back. I had an easy answer for everyone, and I was so satisfied in my self-righteousness. Me and my church, casually saying things like “everyone will burn for eternity, unless…” without ever looking at the statement. My biggest difficulty is that evangelicals do not like to hold to things under the fire. What I mean by that is they do not like to test out their faith and ask hard questions, like the prophets did with God in the OT. If you really believe that people will burn for eternity, doesn't it sadden you or make you wonder about a loving God? Yes, we're human, and we have a sense of justice that is different from God's, but isn't his justice more merciful than ours? CS Lewis writes in Mere Christianity that a proof of God is our morality. Now I'm not a modernist, but since evangelicalism is based on modernism, you can't have it both ways. Or can you? Would a gracious, merciful God actually condemn people, His beloved humans, to an eternity of pain and suffering? Wow… I don't think evangelicals dwell on this. I think (and hope) this belief is abstract, otherwise it reveals a callousness towards humanity that is staggering. If I believed that, I'll be honest, I'd be wracked with sorrow day after day, and angry with God. Isn't that the appropriate reaction? If I believed that my family or my wife or my friends would be suffering torment forever, I'm not sure I could call God a God of love. Or, as John puts it, God IS love.
(if you're wondering, I subscribe to the Jewish belief that those who do not ask God for forgiveness will simply stop existing. This is why eternal life was such a wonder to the early church Jews. Eternal life! Forever! Joyous! Apparently the church marketing department through the centuries (and I'm not exaggerating) decided people needed to be scared into heaven. The fact that evangelicals refuse to look at church history frightens me.
My gut feeling here is that evangelicals are not interested in digging. And yes, i do attend Tyndale Seminary in Toronto, and yes, it is the largest evangelical Seminary in Canada. And yes, and I'm saying this with a smile, it IS problematic for me at times. I've been called a heretic, among other things, at the school and surrounding churches. I'm okay with it. We only call people names when we're uncomfortable with what thye're saying, when we don't want to actually think about it. If we were comfortable in our beliefs, we wouldn't need the words 'heretic' or 'pagan', now would we? The profs at the school are wonderful, but there are many students who are not interested in learning, just copying notes so they can GO MINISTER. For me, it is endemic within the culture of evangelicalism that has swayed too far in response to some of the mainstream denominations which have moved too far away from following Christ. I totally get that. Its one of the things I like about evangelicals. However, the fact that these students will be pastoring people who haven't studied means they should hold some responsibility in understanding that being a pastor or priest is more than just taking words out of ancient text and either making them say what you want them to say or repeating what you heard in youth group 20 years ago. Frankly, its disgusting. All of this feeds congregations who are told that they're version of Christianity is biblical, and that they just have to pick up the Bible and read it. Well, no, actually. You have to hear the story and try to apply it. And that's actually pretty hard.
One of my prof's had an expression. “swallowing gnats and straining camels.” He meant that its human nature to pick on little things (like doctrinal fine points) and miss the big side of the gospel, which is working to love those around us. That is much, much harder. Hell, for example, is a doctrinal fine point. I know many people who would consider themselves living in hell right now, and yes, I believe God can make a difference in their life.
Okay, so you never did answer my question about slavery and women's rights. How come?
My sister is in an ultra conservative church. (Cult like, I'd say) We've talked occasionally about things, but like you, she's sold on the idea that her version of Christianity is the real one and the only one. She is submissive to her husband, as befits a proper Christian woman, according to her. She does nothing on her own. Because she is my sister, I know why she likes her version of Christianity. Its very solid. Psychologically, it provides wonderful security. She won't entertain questions because they scare her, because her emotional well being rests on the pillars of her religion. Now, evangelicals call that faith, but that is not faith at all in my eyes. Faith is the prophet questioning God. Faith is never simple, in that it always requires that we ask questions. The purpose of faith is not to give us knowledge, but make us depend on God. Evangelicals say its all so simple and its right there and anyone can have it or do it and they turn, unwittingly I think, God into their own personal ATM. Yes, I think salvation is free, but I also think it costs you everything. Earlier you asked what Jesus had done for me if there was no hell? I'm not a modernist, and I don't equate my faith with the industrialized capitalism and individualism like so many North American evangelicals. As I once did. Jesus doesn't need to save me from hell to be my Saviour?! My life now, is what He saves. Every day is a daily walk to extend His love to those around me. I need His grace and help for that. That is not 'mushy' but hard work and consistently humbling.
By the way, I'm comfortable with a little mystery. It seems appropriate when discussing God. Modernism says that education and logic will take us to where we want to go, and since evangelicalism was birthed in modernism, I suppose it makes sense that it makes the same claims. I don't agree. It seems to much like evangelicals have it all figured out, you know, when they don't. No one does. I certainly don't!! (And isn't that okay?)
Anyway, I am curious about the question of women and slavery, because nothing seems to foster more abuse and patriarchy than fundamentalism. How do you, as a woman, deal with that? (Or maybe you're lucky and you're part of a great church that is open minded and CORRECT when it says that women and men should be equal, as they were before the fall)
Much love
Stephen
Hi Wearymom,
I have read your comment a few times, and as always, do my best to be open to what others say. Your comment about gnosticism is a good one, I think. You're right about intellectualizing faith, it is a paradox, isn't it. And I wasn't telling you about the translations to point out my education or indicate that Scripture is too hard for someone to understand. See, I agree with you! The story of the Incarnation, of Jesus coming to earth for us, of God becoming man, is easy to translate! The reason that God gave us story, the Bible is narrative, is that story crosses boundaries, doesn't it? Story is how we humans relate to the world. No, my difficult lies with what you call 'biblical Christianity'. (That is a condescending and insulting term to many Christians by the way, as if only those who think they are literalists have it all figured out, so they're version of Christianity is biblical, much like gnostics, but I digress) Evangelicals take the beauty of Scripture (The Bible is not God's Word. I'm sorry, but that is just not true. Not historically, nor culturally, nor when properly exegeted. John is not talking about the Bible when he talks about the 'Word of God.' ) and cut it into thousands of pieces, and pick out the verses they want to emphasize. I don't understand it. The whole notion of being 'born again' is from a single verse! How is that 'biblical?!' Paul talks about working out our salvation day by day, and yet somehow evangelicals have turned that into a 'decision for Christ', something you do once when people are playing soothing music in a group setting. (The infamously unbiblical 'altar' call. Tell me again where that is present in the early church?)
I apologize for sounding frustrated. I, too, once believed as you did. Some times i wish I could go back. I had an easy answer for everyone, and I was so satisfied in my self-righteousness. Me and my church, casually saying things like “everyone will burn for eternity, unless…” without ever looking at the statement. My biggest difficulty is that evangelicals do not like to hold to things under the fire. What I mean by that is they do not like to test out their faith and ask hard questions, like the prophets did with God in the OT. If you really believe that people will burn for eternity, doesn't it sadden you or make you wonder about a loving God? Yes, we're human, and we have a sense of justice that is different from God's, but isn't his justice more merciful than ours? CS Lewis writes in Mere Christianity that a proof of God is our morality. Now I'm not a modernist, but since evangelicalism is based on modernism, you can't have it both ways. Or can you? Would a gracious, merciful God actually condemn people, His beloved humans, to an eternity of pain and suffering? Wow… I don't think evangelicals dwell on this. I think (and hope) this belief is abstract, otherwise it reveals a callousness towards humanity that is staggering. If I believed that, I'll be honest, I'd be wracked with sorrow day after day, and angry with God. Isn't that the appropriate reaction? If I believed that my family or my wife or my friends would be suffering torment forever, I'm not sure I could call God a God of love. Or, as John puts it, God IS love.
(if you're wondering, I subscribe to the Jewish belief that those who do not ask God for forgiveness will simply stop existing. This is why eternal life was such a wonder to the early church Jews. Eternal life! Forever! Joyous! Apparently the church marketing department through the centuries (and I'm not exaggerating) decided people needed to be scared into heaven. The fact that evangelicals refuse to look at church history frightens me.
My gut feeling here is that evangelicals are not interested in digging. And yes, i do attend Tyndale Seminary in Toronto, and yes, it is the largest evangelical Seminary in Canada. And yes, and I'm saying this with a smile, it IS problematic for me at times. I've been called a heretic, among other things, at the school and surrounding churches. I'm okay with it. We only call people names when we're uncomfortable with what thye're saying, when we don't want to actually think about it. If we were comfortable in our beliefs, we wouldn't need the words 'heretic' or 'pagan', now would we? The profs at the school are wonderful, but there are many students who are not interested in learning, just copying notes so they can GO MINISTER. For me, it is endemic within the culture of evangelicalism that has swayed too far in response to some of the mainstream denominations which have moved too far away from following Christ. I totally get that. Its one of the things I like about evangelicals. However, the fact that these students will be pastoring people who haven't studied means they should hold some responsibility in understanding that being a pastor or priest is more than just taking words out of ancient text and either making them say what you want them to say or repeating what you heard in youth group 20 years ago. Frankly, its disgusting. All of this feeds congregations who are told that they're version of Christianity is biblical, and that they just have to pick up the Bible and read it. Well, no, actually. You have to hear the story and try to apply it. And that's actually pretty hard.
One of my prof's had an expression. “swallowing gnats and straining camels.” He meant that its human nature to pick on little things (like doctrinal fine points) and miss the big side of the gospel, which is working to love those around us. That is much, much harder. Hell, for example, is a doctrinal fine point. I know many people who would consider themselves living in hell right now, and yes, I believe God can make a difference in their life.
Okay, so you never did answer my question about slavery and women's rights. How come?
My sister is in an ultra conservative church. (Cult like, I'd say) We've talked occasionally about things, but like you, she's sold on the idea that her version of Christianity is the real one and the only one. She is submissive to her husband, as befits a proper Christian woman, according to her. She does nothing on her own. Because she is my sister, I know why she likes her version of Christianity. Its very solid. Psychologically, it provides wonderful security. She won't entertain questions because they scare her, because her emotional well being rests on the pillars of her religion. Now, evangelicals call that faith, but that is not faith at all in my eyes. Faith is the prophet questioning God. Faith is never simple, in that it always requires that we ask questions. The purpose of faith is not to give us knowledge, but make us depend on God. Evangelicals say its all so simple and its right there and anyone can have it or do it and they turn, unwittingly I think, God into their own personal ATM. Yes, I think salvation is free, but I also think it costs you everything. Earlier you asked what Jesus had done for me if there was no hell? I'm not a modernist, and I don't equate my faith with the industrialized capitalism and individualism like so many North American evangelicals. As I once did. Jesus doesn't need to save me from hell to be my Saviour?! My life now, is what He saves. Every day is a daily walk to extend His love to those around me. I need His grace and help for that. That is not 'mushy' but hard work and consistently humbling.
By the way, I'm comfortable with a little mystery. It seems appropriate when discussing God. Modernism says that education and logic will take us to where we want to go, and since evangelicalism was birthed in modernism, I suppose it makes sense that it makes the same claims. I don't agree. It seems to much like evangelicals have it all figured out, you know, when they don't. No one does. I certainly don't!! (And isn't that okay?)
Anyway, I am curious about the question of women and slavery, because nothing seems to foster more abuse and patriarchy than fundamentalism. How do you, as a woman, deal with that? (Or maybe you're lucky and you're part of a great church that is open minded and CORRECT when it says that women and men should be equal, as they were before the fall)
Much love
Stephen