I gave up on christianity

[trublue 939]

Thanks for sharing. Your post reminds us all of defining moments in our lives that shapes our belief....."you just have to believe"....a simple statement with profound implications.

[Lance 228]

I just decided I would go it alone on the religion thing...i dont need someone else telling me what something means or how to view what the bible says...i can read and make up my own mind on that.

 

also...from the start i've never understood how anyone can take a literal view of the bible, the first two chapters of Genesis describe two completely different views of creation...if you have never noticed this or thought about it, just sit down and read the first two chapters and write down on a piece of paper for each the order in which things are created...then compare the two and see what you find...it's not a match.

 

The first book...first two chapters...conflicting stories...that should tell anyone with any sense that it's not going to be a literal translation...so for people to try to quote things directly and apply them to a modern world is just...i dunno...kinda odd.

[jets 10]

it all comes down to this... the time will come in everyone's life that their faith will be tried....''if'', they only believe in what they have read or what they have heard. If you only believe for that reason. Someone or something will prove to you that GOD does not exist. For that reason dont follow what you have read or what you have heard. But instead follow what you find out through knowing him... The reason the veil of the temple was torn into, was so that we as mortal simple men could aproach the throne of God for ourselves and know who he is... You are not saved because of what you believe, but rather who you are. he came unto his own and his own received him not but unto those who would recieved him gave he them pwoer to be the sons of God... Dont believe only in the words written. but beive in the words spoke to you..... get to know Jesus for your self. cause you aint saved by belief,,, but by grace only.... i dont believe in JESUS because of what ive read,, but ive met him and i know him... therefor i believe

[trublue 939]

Looking at the existence of God from the director, Dr. Francis Collins. of the Human Genome Project that is a believer:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html

 

excerpt:

 

"ROCKVILLE, Maryland (CNN) -- I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.

 

As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan."

 

"I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers."

 

 

 

May 26, 2009 05:24 PM Health Former Human Genome Project leader Francis Collins likely next NIH director

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=former-human-genome-project-leader-2009-05-26

[mrb 26]

Hey, while you all are talking. My sister and Jermey and Josh Keene's mother is feeling under the weather. If you believe are even if you don't. Please pray for her. God will hear your prayers because we are all sinners.

[tbgfan 856]

also...from the start i've never understood how anyone can take a literal view of the bible, the first two chapters of Genesis describe two completely different views of creation...if you have never noticed this or thought about it, just sit down and read the first two chapters and write down on a piece of paper for each the order in which things are created...then compare the two and see what you find...it's not a match.

 

The first book...first two chapters...conflicting stories...that should tell anyone with any sense that it's not going to be a literal translation...so for people to try to quote things directly and apply them to a modern world is just...i dunno...kinda odd.

 

Lance, let me regress a little into my past--when I was young, I loved to read the encyclopedia (precursor to the computer-- lol) about the Civil War. I would set for hours and devour that information--I loved everything about it--reading about every general and every battle of the war--

 

From the attack on Fort Sumter, to the surrender of Lee at Appomattox it was thrilling to read. I can remember firstly, the events and battles being listed in chronological order when you went to the section on the Civil War---but, it didn't stop with the timeline. I then would read an individual account of each war, each general.

 

This morning, as I sat at my breakfast table to read my Bible, God reminded me of your post about Genesis. I went back and reread the first and second chapters, as you mentioned them as being contradictory.

 

Lance, Chapter 1 of Genesis is the chronological order of the six days when God created the heavens and earth, resting on the seventh. Chapter 2 is a topical overview of the week of creation, nothing contradictory, only a more detailed explanation of the week.

 

As I wondered how to make a comparable correlation of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, the Civil War is what came to my mind. First the timeline of the war, and then the enjoyment of reading each battle detailing the event.

 

I truly believe the account of the Bible is literal--God would not put us in confusion about his design or will for our lives--

 

If the earth's existence is so precise that one degree to the left or the right would be disasterous--there is no way God is going to have our walk with him be by happen stance.

 

1 Corinthians 14:33 states "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace"

 

Hoping this will be an encouragement for you--God bless.

 

 

Life has many choices---eternity two

Edited June 6, 2009 by tbgfan

[trublue 939]

Hey, while you all are talking. My sister and Jermey and Josh Keene's mother is feeling under the weather. If you believe are even if you don't. Please pray for her. God will hear your prayers because we are all sinners.

 

Done and will continue to remember her!

[bucfan64 309]

Lance, let me regress a little into my past--when I was young, I loved to read the encyclopedia (precursor to the computer-- lol) about the Civil War. I would set for hours and devour that information--I loved everything about it--reading about every general and every battle of the war--

 

From the attack on Fort Sumter, to the surrender of Lee at Appomattox it was thrilling to read. I can remember firstly, the events and battles being listed in chronological order when you went to the section on the Civil War---but, it didn't stop with the timeline. I then would read an individual account of each war, each general.

 

This morning, as I sat at my breakfast table to read my Bible, God reminded me of your post about Genesis. I went back and reread the first and second chapters, as you mentioned them as being contradictory.

 

Lance, Chapter 1 of Genesis is the chronological order of the six days when God created the heavens and earth, resting on the seventh. Chapter 2 is a topical overview of the week of creation, nothing contradictory, only a more detailed explanation of the week.

 

As I wondered how to make a comparable correlation of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, the Civil War is what came to my mind. First the timeline of the war, and then the enjoyment of reading each battle detailing the event.

 

I truly believe the account of the Bible is literal--God would not put us in confusion about his design or will for our lives--

 

If the earth's existence is so precise that one degree to the left or the right would be disasterous--there is no way God is going to have our walk with him be by happen stance.

 

1 Corinthians 14:33 states "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace"

 

Hoping this will be an encouragement for you--God bless.

 

 

Life has many choices---eternity two

 

Well said, I think that you did a pretty good job explaining this. If nothing else, it could possibly show Lance that going it alone is not always the best when it comes to the bible.

 

I pastor a church and I get great encouragement when someone tells me that I explained something to them that had been a stumbling block. I admit that I don't know everything about the bible, but I have yet to find a contradiction in it, I have been presented with several supposed contradictions, but through careful study everything works out perfect.

 

If the apostle Paul was willing to make an argument over the preservation of one letter of the bible, (seed singular and not seeds plural) then I am convinced that it is flawless and that God has seen to it that HIS word has been divinely preserved. Sometimes, what many find confusing is the literal and spiritual connotation of a text. That is where rightly dividing the word comes into play and that is not always easy to do.

[fieldgeneral 10]

I'm proud of those of you who didn't scold or chastize anyone for their lack of faith or their questioning of faith. I can't stand those people who say that they are the only ones who are right. I feel that if you have the faith, that you must invite those who don't to be with you as a friend. They may even be inspired by you or see the way to the truth. I know in the world today, it can be hard for some people to keep their faith , and believe me I've had questions growing up, but it's faith. As an educated person, it's hard to believe what you can't see, but that is where faith plays it's role. If you have the faith, you don't need to see to believe. I know someone close to me who is an atheist, he is a very good person and a dear friend, but I keep him just as close if not closer than others hoping one day, he will discover FAITH.

 

I have been fed up with the people who have destroyed the purpose of church, that is the reason I stopped attending church for many years until this past summer. Big churches seem to have more of this trouble, of course it's not all but some. We attended a big church, but it became more about how much you donated and what status you held in the commmunity instead of the one reason we should have all been there for.

[-oo- 146]

i am having trouble with this too, this is very confusing what im gonna try and say so just bare with me

 

I believe in Jesus and the Bible b/c my parents made it be that way

People in India are brainwashed(only word i could think of) by their parents to believe in Muhaamaad( or whoever it is)

Im sure somewhere in their sacred text that they read that it says Muhaamaad is the maker of all kind

How do I know that God is the maker of all kind?

Am i brainwashed just like Hindus, Buddhists etc.?

If there are any recommended Bible verses, please feel free to put them down so maybe I can get out of this dark world, Thank You

[deuceswild 15]

i am having trouble with this too, this is very confusing what im gonna try and say so just bare with me

 

I believe in Jesus and the Bible b/c my parents made it be that way

People in India are brainwashed(only word i could think of) by their parents to believe in Muhaamaad( or whoever it is)

Im sure somewhere in their sacred text that they read that it says Muhaamaad is the maker of all kind

How do I know that God is the maker of all kind?

Am i brainwashed just like Hindus, Buddhists etc.?

If there are any recommended Bible verses, please feel free to put them down so maybe I can get out of this dark world, Thank You

 

People in India are not Islamic.

 

The Hindus (mainly of India) and Buddhists you speak of are no more brainwashed than Christians would claim to be. They have principles within doctrines just like our Bible that they believe in and are not at all violent.

[Lance 228]

I have a different view of the first two chapters of Genesis...and the bible as we know it was chopped up and revised by the church over the years to a point that things were taken out and included...there are several places throughout where things are not "in place"...I think the first two chapters of Genesis tell two different stories of creation from two different sects with different beliefs...they are in no way the same...again I ask you to write down on two pieces of paper the order in which things are created in each chapter and then compare...you will find if you do this that it is day and night difference...literally.

[tbgfan 856]

When I googled Genesis 1 and 2 this is one of the sites that came up--after looking at several sites and a general overview of them--this seemed to be more in the language a layman could understand without being a theologian or Bible scholar. Hope this will be of help.

 

 

 

http://www.bibletruths.net/Archives/BTAR133.htm

 

The unity and harmony between Genesis chapter one and two. Many claim Genesis one and two are so different that they exclude each other and cannot be reconciled. Some believe that they are so dissimilar in teaching that they actually contain two different accounts of creation or that chapter two contains the account of a "recreation" or second creation. Some do not see the "two different creations" as separated by time but parallel; hence, the theory of parallel worlds.

 

After a close consideration of these alleged contradictions between chapter one and two of the Genesis' account of creation, there are essentially five supposed discrepancies (the following was arranged and succinctly worded by the scholar Kalisch). I shall now state them and then examine them. (1). In chapter one, vegetation is immediately produced by the will of God; in the second "account," its existence is made dependent on rain and mists; (2) in the first the earth emerges from the waters and, therefore, contains necessary moisture; in the second it appears dry and sandy; (3) in the first man and his wife are created together; in the second the wife is formed later, and from a part of man; (4) in the former man bears the image of God, and is made ruler of the whole earth; in the latter his earth-formed body is only animated by the breath of life, and he is placed in Eden to cultivate and to guard it; (5) in the former the birds and beasts are created before man; in the latter man before birds and beasts. These five comparisons constitute the so called insoluble contradictions between chapters one and two.

 

Contradiction number one. Genesis 2: 5 emphasizes the fact that the vegetation of the earth did not naturally occur but was a creation of Jehovah Elohim. Genesis 2: 5 does not contradict Genesis 1: 9-13 but rather augments it by showing that before the vegetation was created on the third day, there had to be moisture (2: 6). God arranged for the moisture and thus prepared the ground for the vegetation which sprung up at the close of the third day (Gen. 2: 5, 6).

 

Discrepancy number two. Some believe they have found an incongruity between the description of the new earth in Genesis one being moist and in the dry condition of the earth mentioned in Genesis 2: 5. Some have even argued that the wet earth could not have become so arid in just three natural days; hence, the days represent long ages. However, it is not difficult at all to visualize the extreme dry conditions when we realize the highly igneous (heat, again, the "light" of Genesis 1: 3 may have been produced by the extremely heated matter) condition of the earth at the time the dry land was upheaved and the waters were gathered into the subsiding valleys. There, no doubt, was a never subsequently duplicated amount of steam and vapor that would result in enormous and rapid evaporation and hydration. Such a dry condition by day three as revealed in Genesis 2: 5, rather than creating doubt adds credence and harmony to the creation account.

 

Contradiction number three. Regarding the creation of the first couple, Genesis 2: 7, 18-25 does not contradict Genesis 1: 26, 27 but only supplies detail. Adam and Eve were "made…at the beginning" (Matt. 19: 4). It must be realized that the account in chapter one does not say or assert that Adam and Eve were created together or at the exact same moment. However, both Adam and Eve were created on day six (Gen. 1: 24-31). Chapter two supplies the detail that Adam was made from the dust and Eve from a "rib" of Adam (Gen. 2: 7; 21, 22). Chapter two also presents information as to Adam's loneliness that "precipitated" God forming Eve (Gen. 2: 20 ff.). As seen, Genesis two stresses the earthly origin of the body of man (vs. 7). We are told that there are about fourteen chemical elements that are the chief components of living flesh, among them hydrogen, carbon and oxygen. It happens that these are the same elements of the earth itself (cp. I Cor. 15: 47).

 

Some contend that the event of chapter two could not have all happened in the period of one twenty-four hour day (vs. 7-25). Again, I remind all that Jesus said Adam and Eve were made at the beginning and Genesis one states Adam and Eve were formed on the sixth day.

 

Alleged disharmony number four. Rather than appreciating the additional information found in chapter two about God forming man from the dust and animating Adam by breathing into his nostrils the breath of life and man thus becoming a living soul, some think rather they have discovered contradiction number four. Adam's body was formed from the dust; whereas Adam's spirit is in the image of God (Gen. 2: 7; 1: 26, 27). The added fact that Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden to keep it is not in opposition to the fact Adam was placed over all the lower creation (Gen. 2: 15; 1: 26). Chapter two affirms that the progenitor of all men was as the inferior animals in that he had life or breath (Gen. 2: 7 cp. 1: 30). Chapter two, however, reveals to us that Adam was created differently than the animals, God himself breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (Gen. 2: 7). The act of chapter two, verse seven is tantamount to man being made in the image of God (Gen. 1: 26, 27).

 

Conflict number five. Some insist that Genesis 2: 19 has reference to the actual creation of animals and birds (at that point in relative time). Thus, they conclude that Adam was then created before the animals and birds. Hence, a contradiction exists between chapter one and chapter two (cp. Gen. 1: 20 ff. and 2: 19). I submit that Genesis 2: 19 does not record the relative time but simply the fact of the creation that occurred antecedent to Adam. Chapter one supplements chapter two, in this case, in providing the relative time of the creation of the animals, days five and six (preceding Adam, Gen. 1: 20 ff.).

 

As we noticed earlier, creation in the Genesis' account is presented as ex deo or mature, ready to produce (Gen. 1: 11, 12; 21, 22; 28). Chapter two presents man as initially able to comprehend and respond to commands (Gen. 2: 16, 17). Primeval man was also created a social being and having the faculty of speech (Gen. 2: 18-20). The Genesis account makes it plain that man did not evolve over vast periods of time from the lower animals but was unique and singular in his origin (Gen. 2: 7, cp. 1: 26, 27).

 

In closing, Genesis chapters one and two are admittedly different. The question is how do we view and define these manifest differences. After carefully examining Genesis chapters one and two, the existing differences are seen to exist not in essential content contradiction but in design differences. Genesis one presents the full account of creation, from the formless earth to the creation of man. Genesis two is supplemental in design. Genesis two particularly supplements regarding the earth from the standpoint of man (Gen. 2: 5 ff.). Thus, the focus of chapter two is on the creation of the third day from the consideration of man's subsequent contribution (Gen. 1: 11-13, 2: 20).

 

 

Life has many choices---eternity two

Edited June 7, 2009 by tbgfan

[tvp 10]

If I might suggest a website that contains some great info on nearly every subject that has been addressed here:

 

http://www.apologeticspress.org

 

If you search their articles you will find excellent articles on everything from Biblical inspiration to evil, pain, and suffering.

 

THere is nothing wrong with asking questions and wondering why, but we also have to do some serious study to find the answers. Unfortunately, there isn't a plethora of material available that's trustworthy.

 

Check out this website and I think it will do well to help all find some answers.

Edited June 8, 2009 by tvp
add some information

[tvp 10]

Also, I have an audio sermon on the topic of why we suffer. It contains some excellent material on the subject and speaker really did some good research. I would be glad to send it to anyone interested free of charge. Just PM me and I will be glad to get it to you.

[Big Orange 1 10]

I believe that the Bible is God's Holy Word. Do I understand all of it? No way. But I also dont understand how I can punch in a number on my cell phone and reach California in 3 seconds. Faith is the key. I always kinda felt more sorry for non-believers (by the way, not saying this about anyone on here) because what hope do they have? I have had a blessed life, but there has also been pain, sorrow, sickness, etc. I would hate to think that this is it. When I pass from the earth, that it is the end. i want to see loved ones and friends again, and I know I will. Keep the Faith, we need it now more than ever.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

People in India are not Islamic.

 

The Hindus (mainly of India) and Buddhists you speak of are no more brainwashed than Christians would claim to be. They have principles within doctrines just like our Bible that they believe in and are not at all violent.

 

India is the 3rd largest Islamic nation in the world, and has by far the largest population of Muslims for a nation in which Islam is not the primary religion. However, India also has 1.1 billion people...

[deuceswild 15]

India is the 3rd largest Islamic nation in the world, and has by far the largest population of Muslims for a nation in which Islam is not the primary religion. However, India also has 1.1 billion people...

 

You're right Observer, I misspoke.

 

I should have said India's most widespread religion is not Islam, obviously there are Muslims there like everywhere else, but they tend to populate seperate Indian states than do the Hindus (to the north and northwest, closer to Pakistan). Out of about 1.1 billion people, 10% are Muslim... and very few are radical in comparison to the Middle Easterners.

 

I realize on pure numbers alone, that is still quite a few, but regardless it is still a false generalization to make the oversimplification the previous poster did that "[paraphrase] People in India are brainwashed by Muhammed" which is like saying "Americans are Godless!" when only about 15% of Americans claim to be without religion.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

You're right Observer, I misspoke.

 

I should have said India's most widespread religion is not Islam, obviously there are Muslims there like everywhere else, but they tend to populate seperate Indian states than do the Hindus (to the north and northwest, closer to Pakistan). Out of about 1.1 billion people, 10% are Muslim... and very few are radical in comparison to the Middle Easterners.

 

I realize on pure numbers alone, that is still quite a few, but regardless it is still a false generalization to make the oversimplification the previous poster did that "[paraphrase] People in India are brainwashed by Muhammed" which is like saying "Americans are Godless!" when only about 15% of Americans claim to be without religion.

 

That's a fair analysis.

800 million Hindi in India, which makes it 3rd largest in the world in its own right, I believe.

 

I do wonder if the lack of radical extremists is in part from India's growing westernization.

[Lance 228]

India is the 3rd largest Islamic nation in the world, and has by far the largest population of Muslims for a nation in which Islam is not the primary religion. However, India also has 1.1 billion people...

 

I thought Detroit was the 3rd largest Islamic nation in the world...lol...you would think so as well if you ever go there.

[deuceswild 15]

That's a fair analysis.

800 million Hindi in India, which makes it 3rd largest in the world in its own right, I believe.

 

I do wonder if the lack of radical extremists is in part from India's growing westernization.

 

I realize we've gotten off topic here, but yeah I firmly believe that as well. I used to share a cubicle with a Hindu gentlemen from India and that is basically the reasoning he gave me. I would even go a step further and say having English as their universal language influences more than just their tongues.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I thought Detroit was the 3rd largest Islamic nation in the world...lol...you would think so as well if you ever go there.

 

I smell a UVA bowl destination for 2011! ;)

 

I realize we've gotten off topic here, but yeah I firmly believe that as well. I used to share a cubicle with a Hindu gentlemen from India and that is basically the reasoning he gave me. I would even go a step further and say having English as their universal language influences more than just their tongues.

 

I think you're onto something there. India's something like the 2nd-largest English-speaking nation in the world now, I think. I might even suggest that the British presence there starting in the 19th-century might have prevented such extremism from taking hold. The British stayed there for a very long time, whereas they withdrew from many other regions shortly after WWI.

[trublue 939]

The following is something that many Christians have been aware of for sometime. Also, India has enacted a non-conversion law (early 1990's, I believe) that forbids anyone to convert from hinduism and there are accounts/stories of ones that have being forced to convert back to hinduism under the fear of death if they don't.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.newsweek.com/id/164081

 

Tide Of Intolerance

Through neglect of its Christian minority, India is allowing religiously motivated violence to threaten its rise.

Published Oct 15, 2008

 

excerpt:

 

"Since August of this year, a spate of violence has swept across significant portions of the eastern Indian state of Orissa. More than 30 people have been killed, thousands of homes torched and hundreds displaced. The principal victims have been the small, beleaguered Christian communities. Sadly, they are no strangers to such tragedies. In 1999, Hindu zealots murdered an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his two sons."

[deuceswild 15]

The following is something that many Christians have been aware of for sometime. Also, India has enacted a non-conversion law (early 1990's, I believe) that forbids anyone to convert from hinduism and there are accounts/stories of ones that have being forced to convert back to hinduism under the fear of death if they don't.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.newsweek.com/id/164081

 

Tide Of Intolerance

Through neglect of its Christian minority, India is allowing religiously motivated violence to threaten its rise.

Published Oct 15, 2008

 

excerpt:

 

"Since August of this year, a spate of violence has swept across significant portions of the eastern Indian state of Orissa. More than 30 people have been killed, thousands of homes torched and hundreds displaced. The principal victims have been the small, beleaguered Christian communities. Sadly, they are no strangers to such tragedies. In 1999, Hindu zealots murdered an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his two sons."

 

The states of India vary so wildly they can almost be seen as separate countries. Each state has its own culture, its own LANGUAGE, and its own take on it's state religion. Clearly not all of India is guilty of the violence, but nonetheless, that is quite a tragedy.

[tbgfan 856]

-00- From what you are saying, your parents must be Christians who took you to church and you were taught about Jesus from his Holy Word. Your parents were following the guideline in God's word --

 

Proverbs 22:6 "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it". Your parents are responsible for your spiritual development and guidance as long as you are their minor, just as they are for your educational training and development.

 

"How do I know that God is the maker of all kind?"

 

There are two scriptures that I believe can help with this question--

 

Psalm 119:89 - "For ever, O LORD, your word is settled in heaven".

 

Colossians 1:23 - "If you continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which you have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister";

 

-00-When you went to school and was taught that 2 + 2 = 4, you didn't question, or argue, because you trusted the teacher, who was instructing you, to be faithful in their position and knowledge. You took what you had been taught and applied it to life, so when you went and bought a piece of bubble gum, which cost 4 cents, you knew the cashier was going to give you back 6 cents in change for the dime you gave. No question, because you knew 2 + 2 = 4.

 

The same analogy is applied here--you trusted your parents and church to guide you in the truth of God's word while a child, but then as you mature you read it yourself, you apply it to your everyday life. God can not lie, neither will his word.

 

 

How I know I serve the living God, is the simplicity of the gospel--he made man--

 

Hindus and Buddhists serve a god they made with their hands--

 

 

Life has many choices---eternity two