Can you be a Christian without believing in the resurrection?

@AMWolfe and @heddle

This is just my opinion … but I would say the kind of tent we are in is a bell-curve tent, just like all tents.

The top of the tent, and the highest part of the Bell curve, are those who believe in some moderate harmonization between the “first somethings” of the human population… a population produced by Evolution, with God’s design and nudges, where God draws our attention to the first humans to find God’s morality in their hearts.

@Swamidass represents one end of the curve, where he accommodates Special Creation for the appearance of a special human couple, who influence all the rest of humanity existing at that time. His scenario even allows for the Special Creation of these 2 humans to have happened around 6,000 years ago, or 4000 BCE.

On the other side of the top of the curve, you have Christians who are perfectly content with the idea that Adam and Eve are purely figurative representations … to teach humanity what it is to be the children of God.

Stephen Jay Gould did a pretty good job of explaining what scientific theories are and how they work. For those interested, I would strongly encourage you to read the whole essay:

“Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced Newton’s, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.”-Stephen Jay Gould, “Evolution as Fact and Theory”

There isn’t any evidence demonstrating that the resurrection didn’t happen, but there are literally mountains of evidence demonstrating that the events described by a literal interpretation of Genesis did not occur. That’s the difference.

What about the violence one does to the Bible by adopting interpretations that run counter to the evidence we see around us?

1 Like

3 posts were split to a new topic: Josh’s relationship to BioLogos

Uh oh. That’s a pretty grim view on reality, if you ask me.

Btw, I think deification, the belief that Christians become Gods is also a very Biblical belief and is supported by the early Patristic writings (as well as the New Testament). Mormons are very fond of the idea. I’m not a believer myself, but I think there is something to it (namely, that Deification was a widely supported idea among some Christian groups).

http://www.cogwriter.com/becominggod.htm

@SuperBigV

Gods… or angels… or saints… depending on the definitions (or the taboos)… they do seem to be all folds of the same cloth!

I don’t agree.

Those aren’t my words, I didn’t make that up It literally means that (Christian-follower of Christ). Like a biologist literally means study of life.

Although I need to make a caveat to what I said. Abraham and David may not have been Christians, because Christ has not come to Earth yet… But Christ has always been. Jesus says if you know the Father, than you will know Me. Christ lived to give God the glory and realized God was His Creator and King. So did Abraham and David. So did they live like Christ before the physical manifestation of Christ on this Earth? Again, I don’t have all the answers as to “who gets into heaven”. But I do know without a doubt that God is loving and gracious and merciful and just.

So you believe in 'micro-evolution"? There is no difference… There is no “wall” to stop it, just a lot of time. Do you believe in the sun? Sure we can measure and observe it, 1000 years ago, that is all we knew. We would have called it “micro-evolution of sun”. We had no clue it kept going if time went on. We know the “macro-evolution” of the sun because we see the trillions of other stars all who are at some stage of life.

We can come to the logical conclusion of how stars ‘develop/evolve’ even though we have never been able to measure it because it takes too much time.

Just like fossils. We see millions of other life-forms at various stages, and come to the logical conclusion that we are/were also part of that stage. We can and do measure and observe it on a micro scale, and we can come to the logical conclusion that it happens on a macro scale.

Evolution isn’t proven, isn’t a fact, it is just the most logical conclusion we can come up with based on the evidence we have gathered.

There is no violence to the biblical narrative. God still chose us to be image bearers, He still gave us the vocation of subduing the Earth, and still wants us to love Him and depend on Him to help us love others and use our gifts to glorify Him. That is the biblical narrative I believe in. What difference doesn’t that above sentence make if the Earth was 1 day old or a trillion years old? What if some parts (numbers and dates) of the Bible were wrong or interpreted incorrectly by us? The truth of who God is, why we were created, and what we were created for is still there. We still ended up failing, and God still peruses to rescue us.

It hurts the YEC narrative sure. But do you worship a YEC narrative, or the God who Created and loves us?

If there is any science out there that contradicts something in the Bible, why not believe it. Maybe the science is wrong? Maybe the Earth is 6000 years old? The narrative of God and His love is still the same, unmovable, unshakable, immutable. Though if thousands of scientist say something, I tend to go with them…on matters of science. Because why not? There is not a thing science can say or do, to ever change the truth of who God is, or what He did/does for us and why He created us. The only thing I have seen science do so far though, it is how how incredibly amazing God is. What is more impressive to watch? A guy get up and turn on a light switch? Or a guy hit a ball, which goes down a track, which turns a fan on, that blows a ball, that knocks down a billion dominoes, and that last domino turns on the light? My 2 year old can turn on a light switch, but she can’t set up more than 3 dominoes without them falling.

Why do dominoes fascinate us, or a Rube Goldberg machine get over a million likes? Think of evolution like a Rub Goldberg machine that created humans as the end ‘light switch’. Unfathomable levels of design and engineering love and care/attention to create a human or the earth/universe that way. Unfathomable power to create it in 6 days too, sure, but not as enjoyable to watch maybe?

The more I learn about science, the more awed I am by God, and the more God is glorified.

@still_learning

Hey… you are trying to convince a U.U. guy to be flexible? Done.
Now… convince the more traditional Christians.

If Jesus Christ did not rise from the grave, why would one want to believe in God?

Jesus as we believe was sent by God the Father to tell and show humanity just how much God loved humanity. Jesus did that, He healed the sick, raised the dead, and taught the message of love.

Because many people do not like the truth he was arrested on false charges, and convicted on false evidence. He was tortured, beaten, and humiliated. Almost everyone turned against Him and yet He did not fight back.

What kind of God would have left Jesus in the ground? Why believe in such a God? Is hate really stronger than love? Is death really stronger than life? Is sin really stronger than God?

The Resurrection is not a miracle. The absence of the Resurrection would be a miracle of the worst kind.

Ultimately, the belief in the resurrection is a belief. Humans have proven ourselves to make up stories, to write tales, and fictional accounts. For various reasons. I hope you can find reasons for hope outside of the resurrection. You can believe in the resurrection too, but life can be beautiful even if it’s the only existence we have.

So, you are admitting there was no reason to believe in the Old Testament times?

My issue with the resurrection, is that IF the resurrections are possible, and we need to trust it happened based on ancient writings, THEN every other miraculous event is possible also. And there is no difference between history and a fairy tale

The same God that let’s children’s hospitals be busy with patients?

Do you believe in Greek and Roman history? If you do then you trust things happened based on ancient writings.

Why do you not trust ancient writers? Are they inferior to us? Were Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great inferior to today’s political and military leaders?

1 Like

Of course there is a difference. If the supernatural is possible, then supernatural events that actually occurred are history, and those that are only alleged are fairy tales. And this is true in both cases, regardless of whether we believe in the events or not.

I agree in this case with Relates. This life isn’t enough; it is just not enough and is too short. Think about it. I am 62 years old. Twenty years go by so quickly. Natural Theology shows me that there is more than what one sees. Remember, we only experience three dimensions. In my thinking, there must be more than that. I have been with dying Christians including my parents. Believe me, there is more than what we see. My mother said in a death pose with mouth opened and her eyes closed, and she did not use her body to communicate to me. A voice, her voice, said to me: I love you, son. I have seen just too much in my time on this earth. There is more than what we see (1 Samuel 28 and Isaiah 26:19) .

History yes, mythology, however, is not history. Let me ask you, how do you determine the difference between a mythical/fairy tale and a historical account? Is Homer’s Odyssey a history or a myth?

To answer my own question, IF the events portrayed describe that something happened and it matches with our own experiences and observations about reality, then we would probably consider an account historical. The more corroborating evidence there is, the better.

IF the writing is otherwise filled with unnatural accounts, then it’s likely a myth. Using the same analogy, much of what the New Testament says is a myth. Even Christian apologists, for instance, have a hard time accepting the multitude of saints, in Matthew’s Gospel, as being risen from the dead after Jesus was crucified.

Matt. 27:51 And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. 52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

So, lets get this story by Matthew. Jesus dies, and tombs are opened and many (how many, we are not told) saints are raised from the dead. In their opened tombs they sit and wait for Jesus to rise. Is this history? If not, what makes Jesus’ resurrection any more historical?

When reading any material including the Bible we need to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Just because there is some chaff, does not make it all chaff, and just because there is some wheat does not make it all wheat. Just because I admire many of the ideas of Einstein does not mean I agree with all he has written.

Eat the fish and throw away the bones, even while we understand that the bones are a part of the fish. God did not create boneless fish.

1 Like

Well, I think that is the crux of the issue. Of course, the counter-argument is, do you worship the evolutionary narrative, or the God who Created and loves us?