Can you be a Christian without believing in the resurrection?

[beaglelady]

We know you find Judaism, Christianity, and Islam defective and in need of significant change. But what changes do you envision for Hinduism?

[beaglelady]

@Terry_Sampson

• My Comments on the “8 Possibilities”
  • 1st comment is that I need to correct my number of possibilities: There are 16 possibilities, not 8. I;ll correct my table and re-post it later.

Alice in Wonderland always tried to believe in 6 impossible things before breakfast.

[Terry_Sampson ([UILA])]

Welcome to Alice’s Sandbox. Grab a shovel and dig in.

[beaglelady]

@Terry_Sampson

Welcome to Alice’s Sandbox . Grab a shovel and dig in.

Not until you tell me if any cats visit this box

[MarkD (A Whateverist, not a Christian)]

@Terry_Sampson

3rd Question: “If only some are”, is it possible for those who are neither eternal and omnipresent "to make God ?

I’m not sympathetic with Mr Bharatjj’s mission to sell you on redefining what it is you think you are as a Christian (even though I am a fan of radical ecumenism). However I do think you are on thin ice in what I take to be the claim behind what I’ve quoted. In so far as there can be a role for something like God in the emergence of the cosmos I do think what that is must have been of a nature that is constant and never evolving. That would seem to be an axiom of Christianity but apart from what you all choose assume at the outset, I see no reason why what people know as God could not have evolved alongside humans. If God is the ground of being then that could be true whether God as men know Him is God2.1 or 2.2 or 2.N.

[Terry_Sampson ([UILA])]

@MarkD

However I do think you are on thin ice in what I take to be the claim behind what I’ve quoted. In so far as there can be a role for something like God in the emergence of the cosmos I do think what that is must have been of a nature that is constant and never evolving.

• That’s a mighty long sentence.
• It may, or may not be, helpful to retrace the path that I took to come up with my 3rd Question to Bharat.
  • Bharat wrote to riversea, in another thread now closed: “Panpsychism provides a basis for defining God–which is the common refrain of all religions. All matter has consciousness. The Collective Consciousness of all matter–including you and me–that is God. This idea that “we make God” though our collective consciousness is, in my understanding, consistent with the scriptures but against their popular interpretations.”
    • Note that 'humans making God through our collective consciousness" is something that Bharat thinks scripture “says”, except that, in fact, no Christian scripture that I know of says that. In other words, IMO, he’s making stuff up and spreading nonsense.
    • riversea glommed on to what he said and now wants to know:

@riversea

can you tell me more about how Abraham “made God” through our collective consciousness for all of humanity?

• To be clear, and in response to your observation, the God that I–and, I believe–the majority of orthodox Christians affirm and trust in is indeed constant and not evolving. But Bharat clearly does not believe that is true. Ergo, I agree with you wholeheartedly (fancy that! ): it’s an axiom of Christianity.
• Regarding your willingness to entertain the possibility that God has “has evolved along side humans”, Yahweh don’t evolve regardless what the others do. What use does anyone have for a god who is barely a little more clever than us human beings and evolving? Hardly the kind of god that I want to be the “ground of my being”.

[MarkD (A Whateverist, not a Christian)]

@Terry_Sampson

@MarkD

In so far as there can be a role for something like God in the emergence of the cosmos I do think what that is must have been of a nature that is constant and never evolving.

• That’s a mighty long sentence.

It sure is! Don’t try this at home. Not only that but in the process I mis-texted. I had meant to say “ I do NOT think IT IS BEYOND A DOUBT what that is must have been of a nature that is constant and never evolving.”

From outside of Christianity it is an open question. Because it is axiomatic to Christianity it is necessary to the internal coherence of that worldview.

From my POV, since I think there is something real, important and dynamic which grounds God belief, a coherent unified theory of religious practice must preserve the coherence of every such tradition. That is why I do admire Bharatjj’s intent even though I disagree with his approach. One can’t convincingly argue that he is a member of a tradition like Christianity if he doesn’t actually embrace the same defining beliefs. You may be a fine fellow but that is clearly neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for being hailed as a fellow Christian.

[Terry_Sampson ([UILA])]

@MarkD

You may be a fine fellow but that is clearly neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for being hailed as a fellow Christian.

Which is one reason why the last people on earth Christians should take their definition of a Christian from are non-Christians. As for being a fine fellow, I’m as defective as they come.

@MarkD

One can’t convincingly argue that he is a member of a tradition like Christianity if he doesn’t actually embrace the same defining beliefs.

My mission in life is not to convince humans that I am a Christian. I pack my luggage a lot lighter than many.

@MarkD

That is why I do admire Bharatjj’s intent even though I disagree with his approach.

I neither agree with his intent nor with his approach.

@MarkD

Because it is axiomatic to Christianity it is necessary to the internal coherence of that worldview.

• I disagree. IMO, the assertion that Yahweh is constant and not evolving is essential to trusting Him
  • Mattew 7:24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it."
• My house may be a shack, but at least I know where to build it.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Some build bigger barns… on sand.

[MarkD (A Whateverist, not a Christian)]

@Terry_Sampson

the assertion that Yahweh is constant and not evolving is essential to trusting Him

I’m sure that is true too. It just isn’t part of my truth since I’m not a member of the club.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Some people believe in alternative facts.
 

The Latin anagram answers Pilate’s question:

Quid est veritas? “What is truth?”
Est vir qui adest: “It is the man who is here.”

[Terry_Sampson ([UILA])]

@beaglelady

Not until you tell me if any cats visit this box

No cats, but there are a lot of rabbit holes. And occasionally an un-tethered balloon with a string attached to it floats by.

[bharatjj (Let the Truth Out)]

@MarkD

, I see no reason why what people know as God could not have evolved alongside humans.

I like this. Thanks.

[bharatjj (Let the Truth Out)]

@beaglelady

But what changes do you envision for Hinduism?

Three major errors. 1. Idols are like the Christian Cross. But Hindus have delinked the idols from God. 2. God has a purpose–evolution to Unity. Hindus deny evolution. 3. Caste system.

[bharatjj (Let the Truth Out)]

@Terry_Sampson

Note that 'humans making God through our collective consciousness" is something that Bharat thinks scripture “says”, except that, in fact, no Christian scripture that I know of says that. In other words, IMO, he’s making stuff up and spreading nonsense.

I give my understanding briefly below.

1 Every particle has consciousness (Panpsychism).

2 Consciousness of parts coalesces to make a Collective Consciousness (CC) (Durkheim).

3 The CC deeply influences or “governs” the individual (Durkheim). Just as the President made by the people governs the people.

4 The CC resides in the unconscious (Jung).

5 CC is what we call “God.” So, our collective consciousness coalesces to make God, Who, in turn, governs us through our unconscious. The scriptures, of course, do not say this. But they do not deny this either to my understanding.

The references for these statements can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/170sonIEyIRV-QR5uYa9rbsRQYQNnkaE9/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=115481530671741156769&rtpof=true&sd=true

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Lots of sand.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
John 14:6

[Terry_Sampson ([UILA])]

Do you know how big a particle is and what its only reasonable attributes are?

[bharatjj (Let the Truth Out)]

@Dale

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
John 14:6

Yes, for that time and place.

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist)]

You have not thoroughly read the Gospels, and certainly not the rest of the New Testament or you would not be saying such silliness, if you really think we should take it that way.

 
But of course you said this too, didn’t you, still imagining for some reason that others should take you seriously:

@bharatjj

This idea that “we make God” though our collective consciousness is, in my understanding, consistent with the scriptures but against their popular interpretations.

 
To which I replied:

@Dale

Your ‘understanding’ is badly mistaken. Please demonstrate how it is consistent with the New Testament, the Christian scriptures, in any way. (Please stop making stuff up as you go – it really is pretty obvious.)