zerinus Posted August 5, 2011 Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14417362Scroll down to watch two video clips, or read the text. Here is an extract:Mr Hendrikse describes the Bible's account of Jesus's life as a mythological story about a man who may never have existed, even if it is a valuable source of wisdom about how to lead a good life.His book Believing in a Non-Existent God led to calls from more traditionalist Christians for him to be removed. However, a special church meeting decided his views were too widely shared among church thinkers for him to be singled out.A study by the Free University of Amsterdam found that one-in-six clergy in the PKN [Protestant Church in the Netherlands] and six other smaller denominations was either agnostic or atheist. Edited August 5, 2011 by zerinus
The Nehor Posted August 5, 2011 Posted August 5, 2011 I'm curious why religion is the one place people feel justified in having someone in a job where they are teaching and people are okay with them not believing? Can you imagine this happening in a political party? A Republican who espouses the Democratic party and states he thinks the Republicans are wrong. Or a company salesman or spokesman that doesn't believe in the product? Or even a group dedicated to a hobby being taught by someone who thinks the hobby is a waste of time?Why do churches want these people teaching?
zerinus Posted August 5, 2011 Author Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) I'm curious why religion is the one place people feel justified in having someone in a job where they are teaching and people are okay with them not believing? Can you imagine this happening in a political party? A Republican who espouses the Democratic party and states he thinks the Republicans are wrong. Or a company salesman or spokesman that doesn't believe in the product? Or even a group dedicated to a hobby being taught by someone who thinks the hobby is a waste of time?Why do churches want these people teaching?If you read my extract, you will know that they are not an isolated group. One in six clergy fall in that category. And with the number of priests falling, if you are desperate enough you will hire a Democrat to do a Republican job! And what about all that congregation who approve of that kind of teaching? Edited August 5, 2011 by zerinus
The Nehor Posted August 5, 2011 Posted August 5, 2011 If you read my extract, you will know that they are not an isolated group.Read it. This is a problem in many Churches.One in six clergy fall in that category.I would call them dishonest but for some reason they're allowed to stay.And with the number of priests falling, if you are desperate enough you will hire a Democrat to do a Republican job!I'd rather get an uneducated believer to step in.And what about all that congregation who approve of that kind of teaching?They depress me. In any case they should break with the Christian faith and start some kind of secular "Feel good about yourself and learn morals" group. 1
Jeff K. Posted August 5, 2011 Posted August 5, 2011 The PKN has gone through some recent changes, one in which it has joined with a much larger secular church, resulting in many congregations splitting off and forming a separate "Restored Reformist..." and so on. This is simply one result of the church becoming more secular in its approach. The issue is that with such a position, there really isn't a true or objective ethos by which members can guage and manage their behavior. "What would Jesus do" becomes "What would that mythical man no one believes in do". The church then becomes relegated to a social club with nothing but an ephemeral connection one with another. It isn't a church, merely a gathering of people, and their connection? Neither behavior, nor hope, nor faith, only geography.
ERayR Posted August 5, 2011 Posted August 5, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14417362Scroll down to watch two video clips, or read the text. Here is an extract:Mr Hendrikse describes the Bible's account of Jesus's life as a mythological story about a man who may never have existed, even if it is a valuable source of wisdom about how to lead a good life.His book Believing in a Non-Existent God led to calls from more traditionalist Christians for him to be removed. However, a special church meeting decided his views were too widely shared among church thinkers for him to be singled out.A study by the Free University of Amsterdam found that one-in-six clergy in the PKN [Protestant Church in the Netherlands] and six other smaller denominations was either agnostic or atheist.All I can say is WOW.
kolipoki09 Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 All I can say is WOW.Better than Don Bradley's Kinderhook presentation? Dang.
ERayR Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Better than Don Bradley's Kinderhook presentation? Dang.Unfortunatly my wife had another medical emergency and I was unable to listen to any of todays presentations.
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) Though I disagree strongly with the Reverend in the article, I think it is important to understand that his beliefs are just as well (or poorly) intellectually justified as any religious belief.We rely on direct personal experience as Mormons, and so does he.So though I differ with him on "what" I believe- as far as what I think is "true" about Jesus and the resurrection etc- looking at his point of view is useful for understanding that his "methodology" is no better or worse than ours- he is relying on personal experience for what he believes.We may believe in a stronger personal experience than he does- my spiritual experiences have left no doubt in my mind about God's "existence"- but yet, those experiences ARE ultimately personal experiences which are not fully expressible to anyone else except by the Spirit- ie- through their own personal "verification" of things we might share. That communication is what "happens" between us- sharing the spirit.So though we would disagree about beliefs, certainly I think we can see this guy as holding the same positions we do on questions like whether or not science and religion are in conflict.So I think it is important that we distinguish that- don't confuse what he believes with his religious methodology.We cannot "know" that Jesus is the Christ except by personal revelation- personal experience, so in many ways, I think I would agree with him in those limited areas. Edited August 6, 2011 by mfbukowski
ERayR Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Though I disagree strongly with the Reverend in the article, I think it is important to understand that his beliefs are just as well (or poorly) intellectually justified as any religious belief.We rely on direct personal experience as Mormons, and so does he.So though I differ with him on "what" I believe- as far as what I think is "true" about Jesus and the resurrection etc- looking at his point of view is useful for understanding that his "methodology" is no better or worse than ours- he is relying on personal experience for what he believes.We may believe in a stronger personal experience than he does- my spiritual experiences have left no doubt in my mind about God's "existence"- but yet, those experiences ARE ultimately personal experiences which are not fully expressible to anyone else except by the Spirit- ie- through their own personal "verification" of things we might share. That communication is what "happens" between us- sharing the spirit.So though we would disagree about beliefs, certainly I think we can see this guy as holding the same positions we do on questions like whether or not science and religion are in conflict.So I think it is important that we distinguish that- don't confuse what he believes with his religious methodology.We cannot "know" that Jesus is the Christ except by personal revelation- personal experience, so in many ways, I think I would agree with him in those limited areas.I agree with you . My WOW was not for his beliefs. I know a number of other people who believe very similarly if not the same. My exclamation was because nobody I know who believes that way would even consider being a Pastor or Minister.
Jeff K. Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 I bet they will still be called "Christian" while people will still argue the point regarding our church. Oh the irony.
bjw Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 I went to a Dutch Reformed High School and believe it or not this was actually more common than some would think. I knew quite a few who were active in Dutch Reformed congregations, such as music ministers, etc. who were agnostic or athiest. When I asked them why they bothered with the religion, they told me that they were involved just in case it was true, that they believed more than likely there was no God or Jesus and that the Bible was probably not true, but they enjoyed the social interactions of church and thought of it as a sort-of "fire insurance" just in case there was a God. Don't misunderstand me, this was not the norm, most people did believe, but the ones like I just described, though a minority, were present in greater numbers than most would think.
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Logically, what is the difference between believing Jesus (as the son of God- and savior) is a "myth" and saying that his existence cannot be historically, scientifically proven?
Rob Bowman Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Jeff K.,You wrote:I bet they will still be called "Christian" while people will still argue the point regarding our church. Oh the irony. Groan. I was hoping no one would say something like this. If you're thinking of evangelicals, you could not be more wrong. Any so-called church that denies the existence of God is not a Christian church. Period.
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) Groan. I was hoping no one would say something like this. If you're thinking of evangelicals, you could not be more wrong. Any so-called church that denies the existence of God is not a Christian church. Period.LOLWhich God are they denying?Since you believe that we believe in a different "God" than you do- maybe they just deny the existence of the wrong God. So if the Mormon God doesn't exist, does that make us atheists?Can you see how absurd the whole idea is that we worship a different God or Christ? Edited August 6, 2011 by mfbukowski
Gervin Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) Can you see how absurd the whole idea is that we worship a different God or Christ?If I say I worship Christ and claim that the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision is the Father of Lies would you say that you and I worship the same Christ? Just curious. Edited August 6, 2011 by Gervin
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) If I say I worship Christ and claim that the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision is the Father of Lies would you say that you and I worship the same Christ? Just curious.Those are interesting statements. They would have totally different meanings if you were Mormon or not.The same Christ as what?But have you seen both, and can prove that they are the same or different or whatever it is you are saying?In other words, we have a little bit of an epistemological problem there.And what if you were mistaken?It just gets sillier and sillier. Edited August 6, 2011 by mfbukowski 2
Gervin Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Those are interesting statements. They would have totally different meanings if you were Mormon or not.The same Christ as what?But have you seen both, and can prove that they are the same or different or whatever it is you are saying?In other words, we have a little bit of an epistemological problem there.And what if you were mistaken?It just gets sillier and sillier.Allow me to simplify. Do you believe in and worship the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision?
Gervin Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) <<double post>> Edited August 6, 2011 by Gervin
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 (edited) I've got it. Put them all in a line up and let Gervin make the ID's and then Rob and Gervin can argue about which is which, and how they know that.Just like on TV!Invisible people are a little hard to ID I guess. Edited August 6, 2011 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 Allow me to simplify. Do you believe in and worship the Christ of Joseph Smith's First Vision?Gosh, I thought there was only one! How many are there? And how could you tell?
BCSpace Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 If you read my extract, you will know that they are not an isolated group. One in six clergy fall in that category. And with the number of priests falling, if you are desperate enough you will hire a Democrat to do a Republican job! And what about all that congregation who approve of that kind of teaching? I'll bet it's much more than 1 in 6. Atheism has been the direction of Protestantism for many decades now. There are a few conservative sects like Baptists who still believe, but most others are split liberal/conservative with the believing conservatives dwindling.
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 I'll bet it's much more than 1 in 6. Atheism has been the direction of Protestantism for many decades now. There are a few conservative sects like Baptists who still believe, but most others are split liberal/conservative with the believing conservatives dwindling.Especially in Europe.Without personal spiritual confirmation, there must be less and less to hang onto as the Bible becomes seen more and more to be just literature.
Gervin Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 I've got it. Put them all in a line up and let Gervin make the ID's and then Rob and Gervin can argue about which is which, and how they know that.Just like on TV!Invisible people are a little hard to ID I guess.I've got it: you'd rather make the post about me or Rob Bowman as a way to avoid addressing the question I posted. It was a simple question that allowed you to testify about your beliefs. You punted. Got it.
mfbukowski Posted August 6, 2011 Posted August 6, 2011 I've got it: you'd rather make the post about me or Rob Bowman as a way to avoid addressing the question I posted. It was a simple question that allowed you to testify about your beliefs. You punted. Got it.Of course it's about you and Rob, and those who believe the absurdity that we believe in "another Jesus". The entire notion doesn't even make sense any more than the idea that atheists can be Christian. It seems you understand that part just fine. And I hardly need your permission to bear my testimony.
Recommended Posts