The Marketing Of Christianity

I suggest that the more we learn about how the universe works the more we see the likelihood of an intelligent root cause. Worship is not about feeding the divine ego but about my understanding that it isn’t all about me, and better equipping me to, (as per my signature), humbly love justice and kindness. It doesn’t condemn other belief systems, it condemns hatred, injustice, cruelty etc. It is about the resurrection of all things with the ability to reject love of self at the expense of others and embracing love of God’s creatures and creation. That is obviously only partially true. There are those born in Christian families and cultures who reject Christianity and some born in non-Christian families and cultures who embrace the Christian faith. Yes there is ambiguity about the religion. The fundamental message though on which we agree is that God is a god of love and that He wants us to reflect that love into His creation. Christianity is man’s effort to work out where God fits into this world and neither Phat, Jar, Faith nor even I have it all worked out perfectly.
As I see it Christianity centres on the resurrection of Jesus which affirms His life and message to give us an understanding of God’s nature and His ultimate plan for this world. It is painted in broad brush strokes without definitive knowledge in spite of what fundamentalists will say.
As I’ve said elsewhere the Bible tells the story of the progressive revelation of God and that still holds true today.

I just wanted to respond to this. I just don't see it as judgment based on what we do. I was raised in a loving home which gave me a sense of self worth. Should I be judged according to what I do in comparison to someone who was raised in an abusive non-loving environment or maybe even in an environment where I am encouraged to blow myself up in order to kill others.
I suggest that in this life we are called to embrace a trajectory that moves us towards hearts that love others sacrificially and away from self love at the expense of others. The things that we do are derived from what and who we love.

First off things aren’t exactly as I would like them to be. Basically I would have preferred the idea that I would be king and you minions would be groveling at my feet, but actually I came to believe that isn’t the way the world is supposed to work. As I have said before the Christian faith all boils down to the resurrection. If God resurrected Jesus then everything changes. If God did not resurrect Jesus then you are essentially correct about the Christian faith.Actually I contend that what I believe about the Christian faith is based more on what was believed by the first writers of the Gospels and epistles and reject a lot that came later in the reformation. I believe that the historical context that the NT was written in is fundamental to understanding what the writers had to say and why they said it.Incidentally, I don’t see it as being about getting to heaven as such anyway but ultimately about the renewal of all things including our world. Christianity does encompass humanism though. Jesus’ message of love your neighbor etc can be considered humanism. However that is just one side of Christianity. As I said to jar, the other side is the Christian narrative of what God is doing in and for this world, and what the final plan is in broad brush strokes, but not in detail.

Well ya. However, I don't really know what I would think if it wasn't for the influence of God in all of our lives. I do know that my Christian faith has caused me to change my views on a number of things. First off resurrection was not a term that people would use for what happened to Lazarus. That was a case of bringing him back to life as we know it. He eventually did die. Resurrection was about Jesus passing through death and coming out the other side in a new and eternal physicality that seemed to be able to pass between God's dimension and our own.As far as Jewish prophesy goes I don't see it necessarily as someone who supernaturally foretold the future. My own thinking is that they were views held by the early Jews that God was going to do something special for them that would give them what they wanted, which was that they would be the powerful nation and dominate their neighbours.God seems primarily to work through people, and seems to have worked through the man Jesus to redefine and fulfill these prophesies, in reaction to what they hoped for, as I have talked about numerous times in other threads. I don't buy that. There have been rare occasions where people have been burned for heresy but I don't see my views as being outside the norm. NT Wright is called by Newsweek as the world's leading New Testament scholar and my views have been influenced by him and are consistent with his in the vast majority of cases.

To some degree you are correct. Religions are not from God as such. The Bible is, as I have said, a progressive revelation of God working with the human race over time. Religions are man's attempt to understand what it is that a divine being or beings has done, is doing, well do, and how this should influence our lives.Most world religions were about, and to a lessor degree still are about trying to get their deities to do what it is that they want them to do. In the OT though although that view is prominent there are threads within that narrative of things like love your neighbour and even your enemy. In the climax of the Biblical narrative we find Jesus pulling those threads together and saying that all the law and the prophets are brought together in the love of others.It is a good thing to take that message on board, but there is no need to build a specific religion around the life and message of Jesus Christ except that God resurrected Jesus. So yes, religions are man made from man's attempt to understand and deal with a divine entity but with Christianity it is a case of God reaching down to us as opposed to us reaching up to God. Also the message became, (although often abused), not about how we can control God but about giving our hearts over to God and serving Him, by loving and serving His creation.I contend that my beliefs were held essentially as is by the writers of the Gospels and Epistles, although as I believe it is a progressive revelation, some beliefs have changed over time.

Most of what are usually considered to be prophesies about end times were actually political messages to the zealots and others who wanted to raise a military force to get rid of the Romans. Jesus was talking about what would happen within a generation if they didn't cool their heals. This actually did happen in 70 AD but I contend that was simply Jesus' understanding of His world at that time and wasn't based on supernatural knowledge.There was also mention of Jesus returning at the end of time and then just like today some people figured it would happen in their life time. That's pretty much human nature. The message is that whenever time as we know it ends Jesus will be there with us. We are simply going to disagree about that. Things are the way they are and we have now way of having certainty or not about divine intervention.If God were just to make the world that way out the outset then we would have been simply puppets without the will to make moral choices.

I don’t necessarily attribute supernatural knowledge to Jesus. As I said earlier the prayer in Gethsemane doesn’t make sense if Jesus had absolute knowledge of what would happen to Him post resurrection. It appears as if He believed that God would somehow affirm and vindicate Him but it seems by the Gospel account that He went into Jerusalem knowing what the punishment would be for what He was going to do, as a great act of faith.
I see Him as God because He perfectly embodied the eternal Word and nature of God. Jesus embodied Yahweh’s return to the Jews and God vindicated and affirmed Jesus by resurrecting Him and making Him Lord. I don’t know why things are the way they are. We live in a world with time flowing in one direction and subject to entropy. Maybe it is the only way it can be, but we as humans have the God given capability to mitigate much of the suffering. It is interesting to note that it is the countries with a Judeo Christian heritage that are the forerunners in that mission, both in our own countries and in other parts of the world.

There was a belief amongst early Jews that there would ultimately be a general resurrection, presumably just for the Jews at the end of time. That follows along to a degree with the story of the dry bones being re-enfleshed in Ezekiel. It was about new life not a continuation of the old which would still ultimately end in death.
Here is a link to a site where N T Wright talks about resurrection.
Resurrection of resurrection

No, Jesus was a man who experienced life as such. The miracles, as well as the message was God, who Jesus prayed to and called Father acting through Jesus. As I said earlier Jesus embodied the return of Yahweh. That is what you believe. We just disagree on whether it was "set up" by an intelligent agent or by an endless series mindless processes but we've been down this road before.

Well if it works then maybe that's because I'm right. I don't see Jesus as having supernatural knowledge of the future. I see Him predicting future events and believing certain things on faith through prayer, observation and the scriptures. I do believe that He was incarnated or embodied with the perfect nature of God.If Jesus was not resurrected then I am in agreement with you that they are just made up stories, although there is absolutely no reasonable explanation of why they would choose to do that. It led to nothing but pain and sacrifice and certainly not to wealth or power.If though, as I believe, Jesus was resurrected then we have to give credibility to the stories, and work out what that means to our world and our lives and that is what Christians have been doing over the centuries.

I agree that it can't be proven by any scientific method, mathematically or otherwise. It isn't something though I've made up on the fly. I have spent considerable time researching the subject and my views have been formed over time. My understanding is actually consistent, which I agree does not necessarily make it right. Certainly that is the toughest issue a Christian has to deal with and I know I have no answer that will satisfy you. I continue to maintain if mankind is unable to choose evil then he would be unable to choose goodness or love.There of course is the other issues such why natural disasters. As I see a loving God in Jesus I have to assume that for whatever reason, in a universe where time only flows in one direction and entropy is the norm, natural disasters are an inevitable outcome.As far as the violent competition is concerned it seems that in order to survive life needs to digest other cellular life. Why that is I don't know but I can only assume that there wasn't a better option and that the plan is that when this world is renewed, and we are not subject to time and entropy then it will no longer be an issue.I do know though that as humans, whether from a Christian or humanist poit of view we are called to mitigate the suffering that results from all of this.If these things really trouble you that much then IMHO you may well be closer to the heart of God than many of us Christians.

You are an atheist but let's assume that you look at the Gospel accounts and you come to the conclusion that Jesus was resurrected. He died and returned in the manner told in the Gospels.How would you then understand the Scriptures? What would that do to your beliefs about the world itself?

I have read both as well and it is clear that the Gospel writers believed what they wrote to be essentially accurate. The question is whether or not they got it right. All religion comes from basically one of two perspectives. One, is that religion comes from some one or some group wanting to serve their own needs, or the desires of their specific tribe. The second is from those genuinely attempting to understand the divine and how that belief is to effect their lives. Also of course religion is often a blend of the two and sits somewhere in the middle.Christianity is based on the resurrection of Jesus, which then leads into an understanding of His life and His message. So sure, it isn't absolute knowledge and there are going to be differences. I have though read the historical arguments on both sides of the question regarding the resurrection. Basically the argument against is that we know it can't have happened so anything else makes more sense. The argument for is that the NT writers simply wrote the accounts of what happened to the best of their knowledge, with some details not being consistent, with no motivation to fabricate anything. Read the debates between NT Wright and either Marcus Borg or Dom Crossan. I find the argument for the resurrection far more compelling than the argument against.Also, the resurrection is the only thing that really makes sense of the rise of the Christian church.Yes, I believe in a loving God. I understand His loving nature as we see it embodied in Jesus. So yes, I take on faith that the world has to be the way it is and that ultimately things will be put right. If I am wrong I would choose to serve a God of love and be wrong, as opposed to one that wants me to annihilate those whom I deem to be enemies and be right. In the end it is about worshiping the nature of God as we understand Him.

Your answer is a cop-out and obviously doesn't answer the question I asked. Christianity is built around people from the time of the first Jesus followers to today, working out what God is telling us through the the life of Jesus and His resurrection. I simply asked what conclusions Tangle might come to if he actually, which he doesn't, believed that Jesus was resurrected.Frankly, I objectively, after reading both the pros and cons, came to the conclusion that the most reasonable conclusion was that Jesus was resurrected.Tangle likes to use the British term bollox when it comes to the belief in the resurrection.I consider it bollox to believe that life has come about by the chance combination of mindless particles, mindlessly forming atoms, mindlessly combing into incredibly mindless cells, mindlessly forming life of any kind and mindlessly evolving into sentient life capable of understanding right and wrong. I contend that the likelihood that the processes that have resulted in life as we know it, are far more likely to have an intelligent root than a mindless root.This being the case then it is not unreasonable to accept that just possibly, this intelligent prime mover could have resurrected the man Jesus to point the way to the life as He wants us to live it, and to demonstrate where this world is ultimately headed.

I accept on faith that things have to be the way they are, which is not as brutal as you claim. In general life isn't about kill or be killed. I think that both of us live very comfortable lives. Wild life still abounds and you find altruistic behaviour in people and even in the animal world.Also we are stuck in an entropic world where time only flows in one direction. If the greater reality of all that is seen and unseen involves multiple time dimensions then 4.3 billion years is a meaningless term. Time is the only way we know of experiencing change. Maybe even science itself will find more.As for the more brutal aspects of our existence, I believe that we as humans are charged with reversing that brutality where we can, and we are to use our God given ability to love in order to do that. No. I worship the god that I see perfectly embodied or represented by Jesus. I can't have absolute knowledge that I am right. I was only pointing out that I wouldn't worship a god that hates even if I believed that that was the true nature of whatever deity you want to name.