Comments on: Doubting Christianity

By: Jason Sapp

Jason Sapp — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:12:37 +0000

Hey Elle,
Some of Craig’s videos on “recycle your faith” are very provocative indeed. This particular one (along with all the other’s in his “graveyard”) have been banned/censored by various Christian organizations, due to their “heretical” nature. Craig’s point in all of his videos (much like Mark here on his blog) is to start dialog (not debate). So, Craig creates sound bytes to stimulate dialog, not necessarily because he agrees with the person he is interviewing. With all of that said, I personally thought Bart’s interview about Jesus not coming to die was a little weird and I personally don’t echo Bart’s same sentiment regarding this issue. Although, I did like listening to Bart’s perspective. The thing that I’ve found most useful with Craig’s web site is the discussion is seems to generate among the viewers (even behind the scenes).

One more thing, before I sign off… What do you think Jesus thought his purpose was when he walked the earth? I know a few places where he says things like this: “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” or “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” or “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” or “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” In other words, I think Jesus had many purposes for being here (in his own mind) and I believe he thought that “having to die as a ransom” was one of those purposes.

Jason

By: elle

elle — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:23:36 +0000

Jason, thanks for referencing recycleyourfaith, i really enjoyed the videos i’ve watched so far. One of them opened up a can of worms for me though, and I was hoping to start a discussion on it, as I can’t get it out of my mind…
I watched the video “What’s the point of Jesus?”(which you can watch here http://www.recycleyourfaith.com/2010/03/29/whats-the-point-of-jesus/ ), which discusses the idea of substitution/satisfaction atonement… the man in the video, Bart Campolo, talks about how the concept that God needed to kill somebody to forgive our sins doesn’t make much sense. In a way I agree, but think there may be other ideas that can align with christianty to explain why Jesus came and died.. still working this out.. what are your thoughts?

By: Jason Sapp

Jason Sapp — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:24:32 +0000

Mark,
I just want to commend you again for generating a blog that seems to let people question their faith in what seems to be a “safe” atmosphere. I like the fact that I don’t see a ton of bashing from either side. I’ve just grown so weary of “the great debate”. It seems that we gain so much more insight and wisdom when we can walk along side of others (no matter what their beliefs or persuasions may be).
You are probably already very aware of this web site, but (as a Christian), I’ve really come to love some of his more provocative videos (www.recycleyourfaith.com) (check out the ones in his “graveyard”). I like the fact that many of his videos (and the people in them) tend to leave us in a place of tension, rather than satisfaction and complacency. For whatever reason, this feels more appropriate than the black-and-white answers that I’ve so often heard bantered about (more so from the evangelical camp).
Anyway, I just want to encourage you in your search over this next year (or so) into the resurrection. I love your questions, but I especially love your humility. IMHO, I don’t think one can ever over-emphasize the importance of humility in one’s search for truth.

Jason

By: Mark Lefers

Mark Lefers — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:19:22 +0000

Thanks Elle for the prayers. I just wish they worked because spiritually, I haven’t done well for 3 1/2 years and concider myself an unbeliever. But thanks for the good thoughts anyway

By: elle

elle — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 02:56:37 +0000

thanks for the support guys . Mark- i definitely don’t think it’s ggod to take national geo at face value, the specials i saw were put together by people who may have had thier own agenda and theorize accordingly, it just kind of opened up some of my own questions, but i think i came out of it a bit stronger, maybe. and i’m doing okay.. still have some trouble but am just taking it slow and trying to trust God. i hope you all are doing well too, you will be in my prayers.

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:04:34 +0000

Hi Elle,

Welcome to the site. While it’s not super active, some of us have email notifications set so you should get replies to any questions you have.

As to your question about history, my advice is to tell you to study for yourself. With the Internet you can find plenty of credible resources that should allow you to draw your own conclusions. In addition, the very nice thing about the net is that you don’t have to fight your way through hundreds of pages of history books in order to answer a specific question.

All the best to you,
Scott

By: Mark Lefers

Mark Lefers — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:45:11 +0000

Elle, Thanks for visiting. I'm glad that you can feel that you are not alone. Doubt is tough already as it is. Feeling alone in the struggle makes it even worse. I'd like to make a suggestion if you are open to it. Be careful about basing your beliefs/faith on what you see on National Geographic. They often pick story lines and commentators that are entertaining, and not always the ones who are more historical accurate. I'd recommend Mark Roberts' book. Also, remember that relationships take time and at times are uncertain. And as you can imagine belief in an unseen deity is probably the toughest type.

By: elle

elle — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:28:21 +0000

hi, i’m new on here.. just searching for support after a rough spot in my relatively new return to faith. i’m having trouble of more of the spiritual-type right now vs the intellectual (though i have a good deal of that too) basically whether I believe Jesus is the son of God or not.. strangely enough earlier today I had some questions answered (i thought) earlier today and felt very close to God and faith… only to have a crisis after watching a couple national geographic channel specials on Jesus: The Man and Jesus- Arrested, which pointed a few discrepancies and had a theory about Jesus basically being a very effective revolutionary who was also focused on protesting Rome’s occupancy. I feel like this theory doesn’t entirely match up either… but it was enough to shake me somewhat. It seems here’s something in my heart that won’t let me get away from Christianity.. I feel like i know Christ in my heart, though part of it and my mind are struggling.. so I’m not giving up yet. It’s encouraging being on here though, reading about these concerns and knowing i’m not alone… i really like how thoughtfully this seems to be run and how everyone is remaining civil and tolerant. so, hi, its nice to “meet” all of you.

also… this may sound naive, as i’m not particuarly well-versed in this period of history (biblical/pre-biblical times), but are there actually sufficient records for most of what happened during that period? To my understanding (again, admittedly not great), there are not alot of records that exist for many historical figures (especially ones that were not rulers, who made a great effort to leave documentation) or events. I think alot of the history of this time has been pieced together painstakingly from a considerably meager amount of records. Is this true? Just wanted to point out that maybe lack of records for biblical figures may not be as big of a problem as it may seem…

By: atimetorend

atimetorend — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 01:31:00 +0000

To be honest my study of Daniel was regarding the fulfillment of the prophesies in Daniel, not his existance. The prophesies, in my opinion, were written during the time the events were taking place, not 350 years prior. I think that is pretty easy to substantiate. Though it needn’t take away from the inspiration of the book, it can still be seen as allegory for the people at that time. As for the actual existence of Daniel, I have never read of any outside verification, but I have never looked into it either. I actually like the idea that the stories were based on legends of real people at some time.

I have read parts of a couple of books about Jewish history by archaeologists. I agree that the Jews didn’t exists *as we know them* until around 600 BC, but there may be evidence for a later date. The difference is whether they are the people depicted in the bible in 600 BC, and I don’t think they are. William Dever pretty harshly rebukes revisionists who would say all of Israel’s history was fabricated at a later date. At the same time, he is not one to view the bible as divinely inspired or inerrant, just that the stories contain fragments of real people and probably some real events. Israel Finkelstein is a bit further towards the revisionist end of the spectrum, but still relatively moderate. Both write at a layman’s level (else I wouldn’t have probably read them).

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 23:57:11 +0000

I hadn’t thought about Daniel, but if I apply the same reasoning I used with Joseph, I would think that it should be just as easy to find some type of evidence for him if he actually existed. He got to what, viceroy of the Babylonian kingdom or something like that? Surely there would be some type of paper trail, to-do notes, legal briefs, decrees he signed, that kind of thing.

I take it from your post that other than personal curiosity, I can save my time. Would that be a fair statement?

I’ve said on another site I hang out on that I am coming to the conclusion that the “Jews” didn’t exist as we know them until ca. 600 BCE. My survey (I have in no way done exhaustive research) of verifiable history of Israel all seems to dead end about the time of the Babylonian captivity.