Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Coney]

Tolkein tried to convert Lewis to Catholicism, but Lewis rejected it.

[MasterMothra]

i have found christians to be very giving for the most part. i also believe that non-believers are just as courteous and helpful as their christian counterparts. i dont think christianity plays any role in determining the abilities of one to be "bad" or "good", or the amount of intellegence one posses.

i do believe that christians are not as open minded as non- believers. i am willing to accept the possibility that there may be a god, no matter how remote that possibility is; but are christians willing to accept the possibility that there is no god, or that their god is not the true god?

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by Coney
Tolkein tried to convert Lewis to Catholicism, but Lewis rejected it.

Do you know why Lewis stuck with The Anglican Church?

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
My mom is Catholic, Arien

So is mine...what a surprise ...I come from a family whose parents' religions are completely opposite even though they are both Christians....that really had an effect on me and my brother growing up

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by MasterMothra
i have found christians to be very giving for the most part. i also believe that non-believers are just as courteous and helpful as their christian counterparts. i dont think christianity plays any role in determining the abilities of one to be "bad" or "good", or the amount of intellegence one posses.

i do believe that christians are not as open minded as non- believers. i am willing to accept the possibility that there may be a god, no matter how remote that possibility is; but are christians willing to accept the possibility that there is no god, or that their god is not the true god?

If Christianity is based entirely upon belief, hope and faith, then yes I'd agree completely with your point of view. It makes sense to say that Christians aren't as open minded because they won't accept the possibility that there is no god, for I don't and most believers don't. However, there is a difference between being closed minded and having faith.

I don't believe that I am being closed minded by refusing to accept that there isn't a God, for I have met him, and that adds a whole new dimension to the issue. What he has shown me and what I have experienced, the interactive relationship with him have proved to me that he exists.

Most Christians don't like to discuss their experiences with God with nonbelievers; we don't do it very frequently unless we're likely to be believed or it could prove helpful to the nonbeliever. I'm not going to email you the 189 page Spiritual Relationship document in which I've been keeping a daily journal of my walk with the Lord, for I don't really believe that to you it would be anything more than sensational reading. But it isn't closed minded to believe in a God who performs miracles, answers prayers, holds conversations with you and gives you prophesies that DO come about.


I completely understand your perspective though; the only difficulty with it is that it assumes that God isn't living and active. If our faith was based entirely upon belief and not upon a living God, it I'd agree with your logical train of thought.

[Starr Polish]

Originally posted by Coney
Tolkein tried to convert Lewis to Catholicism, but Lewis rejected it.

But Tolkien did convince Lewis to convert to Christianity, just not necessarily Catholicism. My stepdad is Catholic, as is one of my uncles.

[Coney]

Originally posted by Starr Polish
But Tolkien did convince Lewis to convert to Christianity, just not necessarily Catholicism. My stepdad is Catholic, as is one of my uncles.

Yup...I shoud've added that the difference in belief caused a rift between them that lasted almost fifteen years.

[Wayfarer]

Isn't it odd that, while JRRT had no problem being friends with an athiest, he nearly didn't continue that friendship with an Anglican? Funny how things like that happen.

[Lief Erikson]

You know what, MasterMothra. Another reason for my not sending you that Spiritual Journal is also because of how personal it is. I haven't shown much of it to anyone, so I wouldn't feel very comfortable sending it all to a nonChristian.

[Rían]

From what little there is in Tolkien's letters, it seems that Lewis just kind of shifted more over to other friends like Charles Williams, which just naturally happens sometimes as people change. Of my 2 best friends from high school, I still see one very often; the other, never, although both are in the area. However JRRT did seem to feel that Lewis didn't like Catholicism very much.

by MasterMothra
i do believe that christians are not as open minded as non- believers. i am willing to accept the possibility that there may be a god, no matter how remote that possibility is; but are christians willing to accept the possibility that there is no god, or that their god is not the true god?

What you're missing here, MM, is that YOU are not being open-minded, either - from your statement, I gather that you believe that either (1) there is no absolute truth, or (2) that the truth cannot be known. You are NOT being open to the opinion that the truth can be known.
On the contrary, I believe that there IS absolute truth, and that it CAN be known (as revealed by God), and it is expressed in the Bible. And I have found Christianity to be consistently, consistently, CONSISTENTLY true and able to stand up to everything and every need over the almost 30 years I've been a Christian (gee, I hope I spelled 'consistently' right ... *runs to dictionary* ... whew!) And Lief is right - it is not just a philosophy, but a relationship.

At the risk of confusing some non-Christians who don't understand the experiential/relational aspect of Christianity, I'll quote a passage from The Silver Chair from the Narnia series. The evil witch has been trying to enchant the children and the prince and the Marsh-wiggle to believe that her underground world is the only real world, and that there is no Aslan (Jesus) or world above ground. However - and this is very important - the 4 of them HAVE SEEN and KNOW Aslan to be real, and the above-world to be real. But the magic is very strong, and they are weary - then Puddleglum (the Marsh-wiggle) steps onto the magic fire to both grind it out and help clear out his head from the fumes and says:

"One word, Ma'am," he said, coming back from the fire; limping, because of the pain. "One word. All you've been saying is quite right, I shouldn't wonder. I'm a chap who always liked to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won't deny any of what you said. But there's one thing more to be said, even so. Suppose we have only dreamed, or made up, all those things - trees and grass and sun and moon and stars and Aslan himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose this black pit of a kingdom of yours is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. And that's a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We're just babies making up a game, if you're right. But four babies playing a game can make a play-world which licks your real world hollow. That's why I'm going to stand by the play world. I'm on Aslan's side even if there isn't any Aslan to lead it. I'm going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn't any Narnia. So, thanking you kindly for our supper, if these two gentlemen and the young lady are ready, we're leaving your court at once and setting out in the dark to spend our lives looking for Overland. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think; but that's a small loss if the world's as dull a place as you say."

PLEASE DO NOT MISS THE POINT HERE! They are NOT deluding themselves - they have SEEN and they KNOW and LOVE Aslan! The point is (at least as I see it - I'd be interested in the other Christian's opinions ) that - what does the alternative REALLY mean? If there is no god, then everything is without meaning; as Lewis says in PoPain - "All stories will come to nothing; all life will turn out in the end to have been a transitory and senseless contortion upon the idiotic face of infinite matter." Evolution says we're products of random chance and favorable mutations. The Bible says we're created beings of such great worth, and beings that God loves so much, that He sent His only Son to die to save us from our sin and restore our relationship with Him. Which sounds right to you? Which really sounds right to you?

[Rían]

And to finish the subject - why do people CARE about injustice and people getting hurt? Because God has written His law in our hearts! (Romans 2:15 - "in that they show the work of the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternatively accusing or else defending them....") Jesus sums up the law in Matthew 22:35-40 - the first and greatest law is "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind." And the second? "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." So why do we have this sense of justice that all of us have; this sense that some things are right and some are wrong; that it is WRONG for people to be cruelly treated? BECAUSE of these laws written on our hearts! People are valuable and to be loved as we love ourselves - no WONDER we are outraged - and rightly so - when people are treated cruelly. If there is no god, then what does it matter if a person is treated cruelly? Maybe they'll die, then they'll be out of their misery. They'll miss out on some good, maybe, but what does that matter? Because they're just random chance and not eternal beings with souls, they won't even KNOW they're missing out. Think about it. What else can explain our sense of justice?

[Rían]

and BTW, MM, I was at the bookstore today and I couldn't find The Case Against Christianity by Robert Price. The closest I could find was The Case Against Christ, but it was by Michael Martin - was that the one you meant? There was also Deconstructing Jesus by Robert Price.

[MasterMothra]

What you're missing here, MM, is that YOU are not being open-minded, either - from your statement, I gather that you believe that either (1) there is no absolute truth, or (2) that the truth cannot be known. You are NOT being open to the opinion that the truth can be known.

no Rian, what your missing is that i said

"i do believe that christians are not AS open minded as non- believers.

i believe that christians can be open minded, just not as open minded as non-believers.

1) there is no absolute truth,

no, i believe that there is absolute truth. its pretty simple; either there is a god or there isnt a god. if there is a god, is he the god of the jews, muslims or christians? and answer me this if you will: if jesus is the only way to salvation, are the muslims and jews destined for hell?

And I have found Christianity to be consistently, consistently, CONSISTENTLY true and able to stand up to everything and every need over the almost 30 years I've been a Christian (gee, I hope I spelled 'consistently' right ... *runs to dictionary* ... whew!) And Lief is right - it is not just a philosophy, but a relationship.

i have found no consistancy in christianity or the bible. there is no independent evidence to support that jesus arose on the third day. no evidence at all that he is the son of god, and no evidence to support that god exist. the only evidence is faith, and what kind of evidence is that?

If there is no god, then everything is without meaning; as Lewis says in PoPain - "All stories will come to nothing; all life will turn out in the end to have been a transitory and senseless contortion upon the idiotic face of infinite matter." Evolution says we're products of random chance and favorable mutations. The Bible says we're created beings of such great worth, and beings that God loves so much, that He sent His only Son to die to save us from our sin and restore our relationship with Him. Which sounds right to you? Which really sounds right to you?

the meaning of life is what YOU make it, not what someone else tells you. of both those statements, evolution sounds more feasable to me than a god that makes his creations suffer without meaning. a god that loves his people so much that he would condemn them to an eternal life of hell and punishment without revealing himself to them.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally posted by MasterMothra
i believe that christians can be open minded, just not as open minded as non-believers.

I'd just like to point out that in saying this, Master Mothra, you completely miss RÃ*an's argument, which is basically the same argument as I used to refute this view. Please reread my previous post on this subject and respond to it.

You see, you make the assumption that Christianity is based upon mere belief, and that is what your argument that Christianity is not open minded is based upon.

[MasterMothra]

And to finish the subject - why do people CARE about injustice and people getting hurt?

people care because we have feelings. just the fact that we have feelings doesnt justify the existence of god. when my daughter had her 3rd heart surgery in 1998 at the Mayo clinic in rochester, mn, we stayed at the ronald mcdonald house. i saw these children that were there, they were so young, and they were suffering terriblely. we talked to the other paents and found out that many of the children would die, they were terminal. these children were infants to 3 yrs old, they have done nothing to god, they are innocent. you tell me that your god exists and that he is a just god? what is JUST about letting little children suffer? your god, a JUST god, don't make me laugh.

What else can explain our sense of justice?

for me its knowing that this is it. there is no heaven or hell. when we die, we cease to exist, except in the memory of thos who care for us. that is why i believe that life is so valuable, because there is nothing after here. christians shouldnt worry about death as much. if they are correct then their loved one is in a better place.

who among christians counts themselves as supporters of the death penalty? would jesus sentence a person to death if he were here? WWJD? see, i have no problem with the death penalty, because i dont put my faith in the bible. i believe there is no judgement other than man's.

[Lief Erikson]

As for the rest of your arguments, I'll leave those for RÃ*an, for the time being. I'll probably respond to them somewhat tomorrow, though. Tonight it's just getting a bit too late, and some of those are very broad statements.

I'll just point out two things on that heaven and hell issue before going to bed.

My younger sister was having some problems with the hell, and I was talking to her about it. There are two passages that I like to refer to about this subject. In one of them, Jesus is upset over the cities Korazin and Bethsaida refusing to believe (At least I think it's those two cities). Anyway, he says that it would be worse for them on the judgment day than for Sodom and Gomorrah, because if the people of Sodom and Gomorrah had seen the miracles that were done in Korazin and Bethsaida, they would have repented.

This implies that there are degrees of punishment; people aren't just all thrown into one tub of fire.

Second, Jesus describes two people committing a crime. One did it knowingly and the other unknowingly, but both sinned. Jesus says that he who did the sin knowingly will be beaten with many blows, but he who did it unknowingly will be beaten with few blows.

Both of those passages should help you somewhat in your view of the Christian God being unjust.

As for sin and evil existing into the world, there we get into the whole predestination, free will argument again, and that tends to be rather big. So as it's late, I'll save it for tomorrow.

As for no evidences existing that point towards Christianity being correct, well, that is definitely debatable, but as it's very broad as well, I'll save that for tomorrow as well.

Goodnight .

[MasterMothra]

You see, you make the assumption that Christianity is based upon mere belief, and that is what your argument that Christianity is not open minded is based upon.

what other proof does christianity cling to, other than blind faith?

I'd just like to point out that in saying this, Master Mothra, you completely miss RÃ*an's argument

i read her argument, then i answered it. so i dont follow what you mean.

[GrayMouser]

Just a quick note on the Tolkien/Lewis Catholic thing:

As I understand it, Lewis was an Ulster (Northern Ireland) Protestant, a group which had been engaged in a fierce struggle with the Irish Catholics for three hundred years (and still is, alas).

With that cultural/ethnic background it would have been very difficult for him to embrace the "Roman" Catholic Church.

Also, though it came later, Tolkien objected to Lewis's marrying a divorced woman, a sin in Catholic eyes (who was as well a Presbyterian, a denomination that had a strong anti-Catholic history)

The Protestant/Catholic split has become much mellower of late, in part due to a common Christian perspective vis-a-vis a more secular society - my grandparents, for example, were Anglican but very anti-Catholic.

[Wayfarer]

what other proof does christianity cling to

A few brief questions:

Do you accept the laws of conservation? That something cannot come from nothing?

Do you accept the law of causality? I.E. Do you accept that any object having a beginning must have a cause?

As a corollory, do you agree that, being that the universe exists, it must be the result of infinite regression?

Bear with me, please. I'm just askin a few simple questions.

[GrayMouser]

Originally posted by Wayfarer
A few brief questions:

Do you accept the laws of conservation? That something cannot come from nothing?

No- virtual particles do that all the time

Do you accept the law of causality? I.E. Do you accept that any object having a beginning must have a cause?

No- quantum events don't have to.

As a corollory, do you agree that, being that the universe exists, it must be the result of infinite regression?

May be, not must be.

Bear with me, please. I'm just askin a few simple questions.

Is the end of this just gonna lead us back to the Argument from the First Cause?